The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-06-10

up the bay which had not been poughed for twenty
should cay that The whole Of Viking poin. property was
worth very nearly ~ 900 per acre Mr.. Edward A. Law
xop . Ds
" located 10 elegantly. Mr. William Weeks, real essas
broker oysser Bay knows wilkins Point and thinks that
81 600 per would not be unreasonable price and
Mr. H. Wright, captain fengseers In charge informs
that Tune ago the government paid 81 500 acre
n rsspsc 70 hss fors - he snd Of Mr. Day l. I, wsn
Point and for which the sovernmen, some Of these days
will doubtless be called upon 70 pay similar price,
should ~ occupancy by the United Statss be deemed de-
sirabe land nom toe report Of the engineers such likely
be The case) unless The wiser policy nov pursued u
making the purchase when u can be had perhaps for
All This, however, - me undersigned has said,
does cxonerNss the Secretary OF War from the rcspon
mis- power and chile the undersigned enoue~asss him,
hes before stated from any corrupt motive or purpose,
or from any psTSp.oo .n other s n any s ~ Ss,n@
adhered strictly @ The terms Of the appropriation.
sponsbiy Of This transactou does not and should not
rest entirely upon the War Department and the secretary
o. wS We have The sv.d'aS s,s Of the o s'c ne
Secretary Of The Treasury that This matter
was under consideration by the Cabinet al va
member OF the Cabinet now much money Congress had
appropriated for the Of this foracason
and bow much money was asked for THIS parcel q nod
power of the President and other members OF the Cabinet
70 have exercised controlling influence the Secre
tary OF war they bad deemed that he stepping be-
yond his legitimate authority. The Attorney General MIN.
self tells his testimony before the committees, that
the question had been put 70 him he "would have no
hesitation ia saying that the War Department, nor any
other department. Of the government authorized 70 ex
pend more mouey than In appropriated for q particular
purpose II n useless 10 Affect doubts upon the subjects
Il q too clear 10 heeitate upon" And yet, In the
face Of this statement and opinion, We hnd the
Attorney General passing upon the title Of this property
when he could scarcely m 10 have known not Only the
amount Of he purchase money but the amount OF tns
appropriation 10 say that none Of his business 70
say "Yes' or "Ne'' W the purchase, worse than "a
idle excuse me Attorney General Is the lac ooer OF toe
government and naturally and properly suppose hat
all quesuors within his oosnzssce ~ member Of the
Cabinct In which the interests Of the government are, OF
may be asced should receive bis careful attention aud
elicit hin honest and impartial advisement
Another angular circumstances In the transaction Ia the
exceeding ooeeness and Indifference which seem TO have
been manifested regard 70 the examination Of the title
How possible that certificate OF clear Title could have
been given By Attorney General or his assistant
llet, when the deed conveying the property expressly
sets forth in Ia body that there Was mortgage of fsb 600
upon n, n mystery which passes all comprehension,
otherwise than on the suppcsucn q the most capaoe
neglect