The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-06-02
ynrARY SUPERVISION OF CIVIL WORKS.

the arguments and reue the conclusions OF inc ar
e on the subject in the Union OF the 2Oth o. April
prepared the suboined communication solely Tor inc puf-
nose OF correcting and setting tue quosuon before m
public in It's true light and requested the editors OF s
first referred 10 TO give it place in their col
umns They have had il now for more than mon'h put
,bey do not seem disposed comply with my request 70
opblish Il ON the ground that twas due 10 truth and
usiee and also to themselves TO give correct information
on The subject to the country and the people who have
far more important interest in It than Is generally known
:, suppoed therefore request the insertion OF the com
municaton in your paper asking its readers 10 Dear N
mind that il was addressed 10 the editors OF another paper
IA ues induced by an article published therein The
communication was dated 2sh Of April, and was as fol-
lows:
HAVING read with care the article under the caption OF
a;,itary supervision Of civil wors in your paper Of the
a2d as also that of the Union TO which yours appears 70
he reoinder and having knowledge OF so much oil he
subject in discussion relates TO the national armos
hermit me to occupy small space IN your paper WIN re-
marks on the subject question Of public interest these
remarks are not intended take sides in the discussion
between yourselves and the Union Both OF you are
that the comparative merits of the two systems OF mana
no the national aores may be best tested by the re-
nts To arrive at these results recourse must be had to
facts Truth and fardealing demand that these iacts
shall be so stated and arrayed as to lead the minds OF
readers TO fair and legitimate deductions. II is my pur
nose 10 take the which presented by both articles
and endeavor so to state and array them
Your article first takes up the laws organizing the Ord
nance Department and from them you deduce the conclu
sion that the national armories military estab
lishments than the private foundres where
made or powder mills whence the powder used in the
army obtained But don't you see Messrs Editors that in
doing this you skip that part of the law which places the
national arores under the control of the Ordnance Depart
ment branch Of the military establishment Of the country
and makes them parcel of that department? Don't
you Also that the comparison between the national
mories which belong exclusively to the government and
the foundres aud powder mills which belong TO ndividu-
ais is forced instead of natural and fair one? The
has the right to make its works civil
military as peases by laws placing them under either
branch of the public service and the law makes them
il the duty of good citizens to regard them The gov
eminent has right fix the character of private esab
shment except in far their work is done for the
government and far it makes the oundres and powder
mills military by stationing ordnance officers at them to
supernend the fabrication inspection and proof of their
products when made for the government 1t pursues the
course the reception Of but good ar-
ces and to take OF its own interest in both cases
the only difference being in the extent which it has the
power acting which is in exact proportion to the extent
to which it gives employment Each Of them is placed
under the supervision of ordnance officers far the
government employs each.
army at the armores is readily accounted for In his
time there corps in the army there is now pccu
iary qualified by education first and practical expert
afeXards to take charge of these establishments
and administer their affairs to the greatest advantage for
the public interest His experience military officer,
his practical wisdom statesman and his devotion in
all measures Of policy to the best interests Of the country
resaw the advantages of securing such knowledge for the
benefit Of the nation and Of training up such corps to be
is Ia "
perience practical wisdom and devotion to the best inter-
ess Of the country that the national institution
which now furnishes with fitted to manage and ad
minister the national arlnores, established during NASH
ingons administration, Washington would himself
deem it wise and prudent have them managed and ad
mnistered.
Next come the figures They are correctly stated in both
articles But Messrs Editors do not perceive why, in fair
discussion intended Of inform the public Of the
wLoi truth important portion Of the figures should
have been omitted in your article that which gives the
average cost Of the arms under each mode Of supcrntend
deduced from dividing the whole expenditure for
arms by the number of made 1t is said that Figures
can't e They certainly will not if allowed fair play.
Your article gives correctly the aggregate OF all the expen-
ditures at the two armores both for the manufacture
arms and for REPAIRS Improvements, and machinery
az follows:
Expenditures under military system, S4sls593 al.
Expenditures under civil sys tenn S4,77T,l04 81.
But the amount Of money expended the only criterion
of economy Ought not the product of the expenditure
be placed alongside OF the amount expended Let take
this view, and say that under the military system there
have been expended Sss593 Al and under the civil sys-
tenn S4Tf7,l94 81; while the made have been re-
specvely 3l5i and 30956 Now, divide the aggregate
expenditure by the number of made and then see
which cost the most But In addition to this take into
consideration the value Of the lands buildings machinery
&c compared TO what il when the military super
intendeuce commenced. The machinery at one armory
alone Springfield has been enhanced in value 6ls13 %
whilst that at Harpers Ferry has been entirely renewed
amounting in value TO at least much Now to any man
good at figures this shows gain by the military supern-
endence Of S5s573 lSmore than double the coinpensa-
ton said to have been allowed TO the ordnance superin-
endents This gain too Independent and exclusive Of
the additional lands, buildings and improvements which
The military superntendence has gained for the national
armorie converting them from sloveny establishments
moruying to the country national factories to what
they now arethe superors Of any other manufacturing
esmbshmen 10 this any other country and sources Of
pride in national point Of view
The presentation Of The Unions views in reference 10 e
%" motel and the "nep model" gipen in your article
uoes not accord with my reading think the Union dis
uncty states that the old model is interior as an arm In
material and workmanship, TO the new model but claims
no credit Tor the change Of the model due 10 either
tenn Of superintendent But he this ~ il may the fact
70 that the improvement in model is due to the Ordnance
Department and that IL would have been introduced into
our service whether civilians ordnance officers had had
charge OF the nrmorics
The published testimony Of men who examined a few
arms At Springfield is Of weight and not rs much
as that Of many quite as comnetonf and rather