The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-07-09

membe1ed. had previously been informed on two dis.
linet occasions BY Mr. Thomas Green that "lhe Tired
egar sOOrk md large contract for shot for The War
Department" and that "a large quantity OF shot
WAS making at the Tredegar works in Richmond, owned
by Mr., J X Anderson and that a considerable guam.
MY was piled up in the foundry yard. somewhere
about the foundry" and who had his suspicious
aroused, and his mind turned directly 10 the invest-
CATION OF this very poin--Ieceived from me and had
an ofcal copy OF that letter OF the 9th November with
out imagining that il could be construed authority for
the alleged contract. could tend to render il
probable that the information he had received had any
foundation whatever. unul some time afterwards when
with the aid OF Mr. Thomas Green, at occurred to him
that PROBABLY Colonel Huger MIGHT be making shot
under that order"
And secondly that whereas ii is now charged against
me that the authority assumed in that order usurped
IN violation OF the regulation because not sanctioned by
the Secretary OF War; The Secretary himself has here ties
tined before YOU on oath, that my report ncang
10 hm that had issued such order, and lranscribng
the order word for word and letter for letter. by him
considered PERFECTLY SATISFACTORY" and that he
" ceased 10 think upon The subject" How could this be,
II he did not under stand as did that had the authority
10 issue that order II any sanction OF his previous or
subsequent express or implied, were necessary, has he
not here. on OATH placed IT upon your record IN the
declaration that the report communicating that order was
PERFECTLY SATISFACTORY" and that he " ceased TO
think the subeeip Hear, also, what is said by Cap
tain Maynader, the principal assistant OF the bureau,
and witness for the prosecution, moi on his
animation but while in the hands of the learned and gal
liant Judge Advocate. He says: 81 always supposed,
and frequently mentioned 10 General Talcott my firm be-
lief thai Col Huger had exceeded his instructions Civ
the anu tRdt
IN giving that order was to me totally Inexplcable
This when he was familiar with every word in the order
OF the 9th November. Need more be said recapula-
ted 10 show that the contract if any contract was made
was not pursuance OF the letter OF the 9th November
and that that letter, according TO lis fair and natural i'm
port, in the judgment OF the Secretary OF War him
fecily satisfactory" to him. The question, then, remains
Was that order the sole authority given by me to Col.
Hugeri Let him answer il himself put the question
to him roundy and distinctly, Had you any further or
other authority from General Talcot in reference 10 the
procuring of shot shells than the order OF the 9th No
the Non oy his .ne
be received conclusive account OF the character
and standing of the Witness his position here as wit
for the prosecution, and the powerful inducements,
if possible, for him to from the trulhal
operating 10 draw from him, in the strongest TERMS his
justification for the order given by hmbut there is
no particle of evidence upon the record giving you the
slightest ground for deprving it OF one atom OF It's con-
trolling and overwhelming weight upon this part of the
case When | inquired OF him IN an unofficial let
ter =" DO you loant any shot shells for Fort Mon
roe? II so, phat quantity and cdiibreSp-his reply
OF the 9Th giving me no information TO enable me
TO cause such purchases to be made, as had sup
posed nigh, be required-my letter OF the 9th of Novem
Der was written, departing IN no degree IRON the idea
which originally entertained that purchases to Limited
extent might be necessary; not expressly implicitly
authorizing or contemplating the complete armament Of
the fort, or large supplies, or anything like IT, but plainly
and clearly in as simple words as language Affords limit
ing his authority procuring them from tune to tune 10
reasonable exent,if they could be had on favorable
y Colonel Hugsr and ny sole reply e Us letter,
peculiar circumstances already aduerted 10, and
gdrded by ham as PERFECTLY SATISFACTORY" Ii is
not 10 be imputed TO him that he did not know his
duty-that he was not acquainted with the limits OF
his own powers and of mine. And if that order con-
tanned any thing more than had the clear right DO,
| it is impossible that it could have been "pertecy
satisfactory" 10 him, that he should have ceased
! 10 think upon :" subject which had been brought
officially and directly to his noce"ihe usurpation OF
power and the violation OF law, by the head OF one OF
the bureaus OF the department confded 10 his charge
If anything further needed this point, il is 10 be
found in The order issued by the Secretary nearly three
months after my letter of the 9th November, which d.
that the heads of bureaus OF the department should
not THEREAFTER make authorize any contracts for
supplies, Tor arms and munitions OF war TO be
furnished for services 10 be performed TO an amount
exceeding Two thousand dollars without previously sub
hitting such contracts propositions TO the Secretary OF
WaI"-an order which was perfectly nugaory and un-
meaning unless, indeed such previous sanction had
been required heretofore in procuring supplies TO an
amount exceeding two thousand dollars The Secretary
says that he informed (and II is 10 be presumed
through the proper official channcs that had been the
practice OF the Ordnance bureau not to require such pre-
vious sanction in cases exceeding two thousand collars
The 1921 regulation itself, If by violent construction ii
be held applicable TO the chief oil the bureau does
express whether the sanction be previous SUBJ
sequent II, therefore, such practice did exist II was
practical construction oil the article tacitly approved and
sufficient justification OF act done in accordance
with it, To this point, ALSO is the testimony OF Governor
Marcy.
Nor was there any subsequent approval by me Of the
order given 10 Doctor Carmichael shall have occasion
presently my conduct in this respect. with ref
eence 10 The last charge AT present content myself
with saying that no such approval has been proven On
the contrary Colonel Huget, who alone could prove IL,
and had every motive to do ii had taken place, has
testified that expressed my surprise at the amount OF The
order he bad given when II first made known to me,
and when as shall demonstrate, at the same moment
all the necessary steps were taken TO make that ORDER or
purchase or contract, by whatsoever name II may be
described completely dead and null and void as i
had for moment existed. And when alter
wards he pressed by the Judge Advocate this pont
and his attention called directly the period by the
! following question:
you say on the cross and in answer 10
the son before the last that had further
thory General Talcou in reference the procuring
and shells than the order Of the 9th November. DO
you that received authority from him
ally here In November, 1850 7"
| He answers
"NoNE WHATEVER; unless his approval Of my letters
Anderson by Captain Stone, and mine to kemble be
sidered as sue h, WHICH DO NOT"
There was then neither prior authority for subse
quent approval OF the order to Carmichael set out IN the
!, specification,
The second charge shall despatch in few words
venture to affirm that precedent could have been
| found for charge and specification OF pUW dtso.
bedenoe Of orders and Instructions IN which Il ~ not
charged distinctly and specifically that orders and inr
in fad giUe and what those orders and IN
suclions were Yet such are the charge and spechca-
for his learning and ability in such matters would enable
him 10 wear the gown OF the barster with equal
and grace he the epaulets OF the soldier,
and the pen is familiar TO him as the sword
i but because, in fact such orders or instruc.
tnns were ever given and have been attem pied