The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-01-05
BRYAN CAILAGHAN.

On motion by Mr.. RUSk the Senate, as in committee
of the whole proceeded TO the consideration OF the
Senate bill for the relief of Bryan Calaghan; which
read
Mr. RUSK. move, sir to amend the bill by striking
Out the words preventing such merchandise from falling
into the hands OF the enemy"
The facts in the case Mr.. President are these: Col
Harvey made an expedition from San Antonio to the Rio
Grande, and finding himself destitute of the necessary
means TO support his forces, the indvdpal in whose
favor this bill is reported furnished him with stock of
goods amounting the value of $25, 900 The goods
were taken charge of by the quaItermaser and were
carried to the Rio Grande where part of them were
paid Tor by the quarermasier and used by way OF sup
plies and the rest remained unsod. Colonel Harvey
while they under charge of the quartermaster
deed them 10 be destroyed TO prevent their falling into
the hands of the enemy, There Of putting
that into the bill, because it property furnished for
the United States. We have the statement of Colonel
Harvey and also that OF the quartermaster TO that effect
The certificates to be had if any senators anxious
Mr. BORLAND Before the vote is taken, desire to
word with regard TO the time and circumstances
time of this expedition OF Colonel HaUney's, a few
days before the return TO the Rio Gfande. The ey-
petition was an unauthorized one; 1t was one for
which Colonel Harvey ordered back 10 San Antonio
and placed under arrest, where he remained for
siderable length of time. The whole act disavowed
by the commanding general and he was censured nc.
cordngly As understand, the goods destroyed
at the time OF the return OF Colonel Harvey but de
sroyed afterwards, without his knowledge consent
He was believe in San Antonio when that destruction
took placc-at least it when he there on
his return Such were the facts reported at San An
tonic at the time, and as stated to me by many who
were there; and, in fact, by Mr.: Caaghan himself
What was the amount destroyed, have means of
knowing any further than is stated in the bill but wish
inquire if the goods were destroyed under the positive
Mr. RUSK They were so destroyed by the captain
who had charge Of them call for the reading of Col.
Haneys papers. No. p and the statement OF the quarter
The documents were accordingly read.
MIR cortland. These statements are all very good,
SO far as they 60 but after ALL they do nothing more,
undar tYn1 q
Col Harvey and the quartermaster Callaghan made an
agreement togo with him TO the Rio Grande The papers
nothing about It's being necessary TO destroy these
goods. Col. Harvey and the quartermaster were not
present the time of the destruction of the goods they
were the road to San Antonio they could knoW the
facts and the documents read are mere expressions OF be-
lief They had suppression" that necessity existed
for this destruction. There no statement by any
officer that there an order OF any officer Tor that
destruction, and evidence that 1t necessary to
destroy them 1T seems to me, sir, that the whole mat
ter presented by those papers, amounts TO this that
Mr. Callaghan was trader, and well oxn dealer
ness transactions beyond the Rio ifande, in the
mines OF Santa Rosa, and he was intending to go
in that direction TO carry out his trading operations.
HI found this good opportunity to carry goods TO the
banks of the Rio Gande and the army should advance
he might thus make a profitable speculation This is
the impression, sir that received not only from opinions
expressed by the persons at San Antonio but by Mr. Cal
han himself the time. This is the impression upon
hs dneumens Which were read Now sir where is the
evidence furnished BY the officer who ordered these goods
TO be DESTROYED that it would be necessary for the pub
lie service that they should be destroyed? Col Harvey
t,rne. leaving one panes behind himor what
purpose not known and may remark that the expedi
lion unwarranabe one and he was suspendedfrom
his command in the army. Now, sir, it that
even if the evidence furnished that these goods had
been destroyed by the officer then in command. under
cumsianees which he might suppose proper and usyng
their distinctions there is obligation upon the part of
the 10 endorse and pay for the unauthorized
act OF the officer who may without orders and without
authority Not only was the expedition unauthorized
and understandable, but the officer punished. There
is evidence furnished by the officer ordering the de-
sructon and, unless the matter can be made palmer
by additional evidence cannot support the bill
Mr. RUSK requested the Secretary to read again the
certificate of Mr. Rodgers
The certificate was accordingly read
Mr. RUSK. 1t seems that this property was destroyed
upon the banks OF the Rio Grande by the order OF our OIL
who had charge of it, to prevent its falling into the
hands of the enemy Col. Harvey, in command of the
dvdual to furnish the means OF supporting his troops
Now, is Mr. Callaghan liable to answer for any charges
brought by the gentleman from Arkansas Mr. BoRLANDl
against Col. Harney' They have nothing to do with the
tar this individual is concerned, who furnished
the goods The idea of the senator regard to speculation
is entirely beyond the record for nothing OF that so
appears. On the contrary know Mr. Bryan Callaghan,
and have understood only from him, but from various
individuals, that he of important service to the
army; that he went with them without charging any
thing; that he conducted Gen. Wools expedition alter
wards, and made claim. know him TO be patriotic
This furnishes to the officer OF the government
these goods That officer of the government takes them
in charge large portion OF them are disposed Of and
actually go to the of the troops OF the United States
The balance under the charge of the officer, and not I'M
der the charge OF Mr. Calaghan at all, destroyed by
the order OF that officer 1t makes difference for what
purpose they destroyed 1t the fault OF Bryan
Caaghan at ALL He has furnished lis goods The
government of the United States have appropriated the
principal part of them to their own use. Their Off
have destroyed the remainder. Whatever SINS
Colonel Harvey may have committed, they not
chageable to Mr. Callaghans character; nor is it male
rial whether there any necessity for destroying the
goods at all, far regards his claim Yet we have
the evidence of this from the certificates OF these officers
Mr.. PHELPS. | am unfortunate, MIR. President, as
not to under stand precisely the nature OF the
braced in this bill | understand the statement to be,
transferred to the officer OF the government to supply the
troops. The residue, that which undisposed Of
understand to have been burnt by the order oil the officer
desire to inquire whether that portion OF the goods
tuay sold, and the value of which the troops actually
received, is what the bill proposes TO compensate or
whether II is that portion which destroyed also
MIR. RuSk. For the portion sold.
MIR. PHELPS. So far as the avas were furnished to
the troops of the United States il the exgency of the pub
lie demanded it, there be doubt to the
compensation. But to that portion OF the goods which
were destroyed, the question turns upon another point
that whether these goods are to be considered as
having been originally transferred to the government ii
they transferred the government the destruction
OF them is of sort of importance in the For II 1t
complete sale OF the goods that the government
of the United States owned the goods, whether they de-
stroyed them not, could have no bearing upon the
rights of the claimant compensation H. however, the
goods to be considered not having been sold to- the
government, but having renamed the property OF
Bryan Caaghan--if he chose TO follow the army with
Them and the goods were destroyed merely to prevent
their falling into the hands of the enemyhen it raises
the very question which have often discussed II