Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1860-1862, 1860-06-28
other responsible parties proposed to f1rnisi

II any. tGat L0GH were tho
agents." vet il is in proof that they were
paid by the Government at the rate of s14.-
900 per annum. Was that right or was it
wrong? Honorable gentlemen are 10 vote
on this resolution. Let them decide whether
it was an abuse or not.
The next resolution declares:
THAT the contract made by the Score ary
with William G. y. Swift. for The delivery of
liEe-oak. was made in violation of Law, and
in manner unusual. improper and injurious
TO the public service"
Before / determined upon the report which
| have made, | examined critically the phrase
olOgy of every line of every one Of these res
olutions, To see whether it was JUSTIFIED by
the proof, and | now wish TO show You that
The evidence contained in the report OF the
honorable member from Virginia Mr.. b.
cock1 justifies me in saying. that this con-
tract with Swift was lin violation of law"
that it was "nnusual;'' that it was ''im-
proper" and that it was Injurious to the
pablo service" Was it .,in violation OF
law?p l say it was palpably so, and chal-
len.e the honorable gentleman from Virginia
to confront me now with denial, if ne does
not admit my proposition.
The law requires all timber to be bought
by what is called ''Open purchase" or by
advertisement for,bids. Was it purchased by
open contract? No; the Secretary told Swift
that he had no right TO purchase it in that
way; there being no such necessity for the
timber as would justify him in purchasing
without advertisement.
Did he conform to the law relating to
purchases by advertisement? What is that?
Advertisements shall be made for bids, and
the contract given to the lowest bidder. Was
Swift the lowest bidder? He was not. A
number of parties underbid him. These
parties, however, failed to comply with their
contracts for want of time. Under The law,
what then was to be done? This is the stat
ute:
in case the lowest bidder shall fail to
enter into such contract and give such Sc
curity within a reasonable Time, to be fixed
in such advertisement, thea the contract shall
be given TO the next lowest bidder, who shall
enter into such contract and give such Sc
curity.-BGgidiy, p 617.
Now, did the Secre airy give the contract
to the next lowest bidder? lie did not But,
IN uloLation of Ia,c, 1riOa any notice achdeUer to
the other bidders he suHmqrily diln1tiied the con-
tracts he had made, and g1ue them to SI0gt.-
again: the contract made with Swift was
dated the 23d of September. 1858. At what
time, according to the only advertisement
made. was The timber to be delivered? Half
of it on the 1t of September, 1858; trenty-
tauo daus before tie coRrdct 10 detiUer tcGS made!
There was no pretense, then-nOne whatever
that the contract made with Swift was IN
accordance with the advertisement; for the
time for the delivery of the timber had
actually passed before the contract was enter
ed into Then it was made without reference
to any advertisement. But he admitted he
had no right to purchase without il; and, OF
course, when he did it, it was done iF viola
ton of law.
Was there anything unusual in this Con-
tract? The honorable member from Virgin
ia, [ Mr.. BocOck. in his report, Up. 32,) states
that
..The usual time allowed contractors for
liye-oak is one and two years; because. un-
like other timber, it is rarely kept on hand
by lumbermen, and generally has to be cut
near the coast of the Gulf of Mexico after
the contracts are made; and being esteemed
more valuable when cut between the lst of
November and 1st of March, one winter sea-
son. at least, is allowed for that purpose
What time was, by the advertisement, al
lowed for the fullillment Of this contract? 1t
was 10 be delivered on the LIST of Septc,nber
half of ito quote the language of the
report OF the gentleman from Virginia. TMr.
tracts were completed" Yes, sir. instead of
one and two years being allowed, as aoas usual,
in this instance tor the filling of half of the
contract tacenfy days only were allowed.
Was there anything Improper in the
manner in which this contract was made?
Facts stated in the report of the gentleman
from Virginia Mr.. Bocock1 shall furnish my
answer. In that report it is stated that
Swift & Bigler had large quantity of timber
ut certain OF the navy-yards, which was I'M
usually small in size, and of such character
that they had not been able to dispose of it.
Swift had the largest quantity. They saw
( he of hn Navy trind In
him to bay it at open purchase without ad-
vertisement. He said he cOnld not do that.
there being no pressing necessity Tor the tim
Der, to justify him. 1t was, however, agreed
6etUreea than that an advertisement should be
made for one hundred and fifty thousand feet
OF the very kind of timber that Swift Bigler
had al the yards, and that the time should be
made So short that no one could compete lruh them
they being, as the Secretary knew, the only
persons who had any of this description OF
timber at the yards. 1t was agreed that
Swift should put in bid, at which the TIM
Der was TO be bought. and that Bigler should
bid also, but at higher figures. The contract
was to be given to Swift, and he was to take
all of Bigler's timber and put it in with his,
and at the same price. 1t is admitted that
the quantity of timber bought of Swift was
not needed, and that a great part of it is still
living in the yards untouched. 1t is stated
further, in the report of the gentleman. Mr..
Bocock, Up. 49, by way of explanation OF
the Secretary's extraordinary conduct in
awarding this contract to Swift in the man
ner he did, that
Swift was an ardent friend of the present
Administration, and had expended his money
freely (more than ten thousand dollars) to
aid the election of Mr.. Buchanan. 1t was
known to the Secretary that he had been lib
eraI. as proved by George Pitt, and it was
natural he should have kiud regard for
him."
Now, sir, in conclusion npOn this point,
state that the report of the gentleman from
Virginia contains proof, beyond controversy or
cdyil, that there was glaring and corrupt
collision and combination between the Sec
rotary and Swift-this .'ardent friend of the
AdministFatioI"--whic h prevented all COM
petition for the contract for this timber, and
that it was entered into by the Secretary to
prevent competition, and 10 secure, regard
less of the public interest the contract to
Swift as compensation for partisan services.
Vas that proper or "imprOper?" Gentlemen
who have to vote upon the resolutions must
decide.
Was this contract Injurious to the public
serviee?" II is in proof by Mr.. Lenthall,
chief of the Bureau Of Construction, that the
shortness of the time allowed to contractors
in the advertisement, made to secure the con-
tract TO Swift, caused the bids 10 be some
fifteen per cent. higher than they otherwise
would have been, resulting in n loss to the
Government of some $4,000. Was not this
contract. thnn sir. "madu in violation of law,
and in manner unusual, improper, aud IN
furious to the public service?'
l call the attention of this House TO the
third resolution:
Resolued, That the distribution, by the
Secretary of the Navy, of tie patronage in
the navy-yards among members of Congress,
was estructive of discipline, corruplfng in
its influence, and highly injurious to the pub
lie SERVICE
ask the special attention of the honora-
Die gentleman from Virginia 10 what have
to say upon this resolution, and / challenge
him 10 deny trtdt noar alifge, that each specific
allegation IN this resolution is fiiily warranted
by cYidence furnished by his n,n,, rerlorf -