The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1852-05-11

ulHers the I'feSluenl ana tlt secretary OF w az
would have the power, II there were sufficient APP
preparations for other branches of the service, I,
provide for the subsistence of the army; and i
would he their duty To do il.
Mr.. HUNTER. | never disputed the right o
the Secretary Of War 10 provide for subsistence
and transportation. | stated expressly that Their,
was special act passed in 1920, which allowed
such contracts TO be made.
" Mr.. PEARCE. am aware of that. But grea
deal has been said about transfers and the propr
4 ETY. Of appropriations. My remarks now are in
tended 10 show the necessity Of transfers. Cases
may arise IN which the Government would dcser
its positive duty if il did not make these transfers
Before, however,, 90 into the subject Of transfers
there are few other topics--rather odds and ends
i than things ofvery large consequence---whch per
haps had better gather up 90 along.
The expenditures Of the Quarternaster's De
partmentin New Mexico, were spoken Of both
by the Senator from California. and the Senator
from Virginia as being very large. Undoubtedly
they were So Besides being very large, there
were circumstances which might perhaps Justify
some suspicion as to their proprety speak
guardedly upon this subject because the quarter
master, under whose authority these large exDend-
ltures were made, is now in this city his accounts
are undergoing an investigations; and do not
wish to say anything which may look like
prejudging or prejudicng his case. The SEN
ator mentioned several small abuses, accidental
and perhaps isolated instances of abuses, which
he discovered as occurring IN that branch of the
service For example, the Senator from Virginia
reced the case of receipt given bya clerk, which
was not signed by him, in his own proper hand
writing, but with his cross-mark That was q
gross abuse. But it was single instance In re-
gard TO that, may be allowed to say that the
voucher for that account is now suspended. am
informed that has not been admitted as proper
voucher. Then there was anotherreceipt signed by
a teamster, IN the same way. And the Senator
Al, -
S25 900 in addition. Well, mistakes, in addition,
occur everywhere 1t is not fair to infer the exist
ence Of a systematic abuse, because there was
single instance Of mistake in addition. | under
stand, in fact, however, that that is rather diff
terent transaction from what the Senator supposed.
It is the case of disputed credit, or debt between
| two quartermasers.
4 Now, in relation to the receipts signed by d
cross mark, instead of the proper handwriting of
the parties Where did those vouchers 90, To
the Quartermaster Generals Bureau. There they
undergo the first examination Then they are
sent 10 the Third Auditors Office, where they un.
dergo final examination. The Secretary Of w al
has nothing at all to do with matter of that sort
unless his attention is specially called TO such
case of abuse, by those in whose bureaus it is ex-
amlned, and where it is the duty of the persons
employed to examine and detect all such practices
The Secretary cannot be held responsible, even il
system Of abuse of that sort should be discovered
|
knowledge. IL is not the business of the Secretary
To investigate accounts. Ii would be utterly i'm
possible for him 10 do So Do gentlemen know
that single quarermaster' account sometimes
comes in, accompanied by five or six bushels of
vouchersi No Secretary Of War, even supposing
he had nothing else TO do, could accomplish the
! business Of looking over the accounts in the most
cursory manner. No, sir; not even if he had the
/ eyes of Argus, and the hands Of Brareus. Ii is,
however, no part of his duty. do not suppose
that the Senator from Virginia meant To charge
this derelcion Of duty on the part of the Sec
rotary. am very far from thinking so. But !
am making this reply, not merely for the benefit Of
the Senate, confess, but because as | said yes
terday, know how the slightest fact mentioned in
speech of this sort, coming from a gentleman of
the character of the Senator from Virginia, would
be seized upon by those partisans who pervert
even the truth, when there is no opportunity to
discover anything like shadow of Just suspicion.
few words now upon the subject Of transfers
/ The Senator thinks that, regard TO transfers,
abuses have prevailed; and he has been candid in
saying that he thinks part Of those abuses origin
ated before the period of this Administrations or
that Of General Taylor. He lays il AT the door
of his own political friends That is fair and can
did. But then he thinks there are other abuses
in regard to that system, which originated with
the present Administration. In that he is mis-
taken. There great many acts of Congress
IN regard 10 transfers; but there are only two &c
which | wish particularly to call the attention OF
the Senate. One is the act Of 1895. under which
the Senator thinks that whenever balance Of an
appropriation has remained Inv the Treasury for
more than two years, II ought nj once II he car
red to the surplus fund. And he referred 10 an
opinion which was given as far back as 1881, by
the Senator from Georgia, Mr.. BERRIES,l then
Attorney General. and who had expressed the
same belief lpresume the Senator was not aware
at the time he made his speech. and Indeed. know
Il. \ L "A 4
morning on the subject, that he was not aware that
"A subsequent construction had been given To this
act by the Attorney General. The Senator was
aware that different practice had prevailed in the
Departments, and he stated very fairly that il
began with some of his own political friends. ]
believe he dated it back about far ago as eight
! years. The fact is, however, that il originated
long before eight years ago. The change of con-
sirucion was effected in the year 1893 or '39.
have my table an opinion Of Mr.. Attorney
General Grundy. opinion which differs TOTO
cGio from that Of the Senator from Georgia, when
he was Attorney General II is not my purpose
| 10 contrast these two opinions to determine which
IS the sounder construction. IL is enough for my
purpose to show that, during the administration
Of Mr.. Van Buren,, the Attorney General admitted
a different construction Of the act Of 1885, from
that which recommended bv the Attorney
General Of General Jackson, in 1881 and that the
administration Of Mr. Van Buren,, and all sue
| cteulilg nave hCteu upon tnat con-
s,ruction from that time down to the present day.
In this connection the Senator from Virginia
referred to transaction in 1850 which he supposed
to be wrong, though presume he did not mem
4 10 censure II, inasmuch the practice had been
pursued by the predecessors Of this Administra-
ton. He introduced the case Of the steamer
| Waterman. ] will not believe that the Senator
intended to throw any slur on the Administration
by the statement which he gave Of that case And
! yet think il is necessary for me to explain il
somewhat carefully, to prevent an erroneous con-
struction abroad being put upon il.
The steamer Waterman was employed during
4 the Florida war, under the administration OF
| Mr.. Van Buren,, in the transportation believe, Of
troops and supplies in Florida. The account for
the transportation considered finally settled
by the accounting officers in 1876. Upon inquiry
| ! ascertained that the account had been reex-
amined at subsequent period upon the prodhc-
ton Of new testimony In 1850 the account was
finally audited and passed by the accounting Off
GERS of the Treasury. They were the present
Auditor and the late Second Comptroller very
! good officer, and quite good Democrat. The
claim was therefore concluded, so far as the obi
/ CATION of the United States to pay il was con-
cerned. Ii had been adjusted by the officers whose
4 1tfx, 4 u.o IN a1iusf The he