Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1861-02-20

friends, that his name should never be public
ly known in connection with the business.
Aut bis precautions have not availed to afford
him entire exemption from responsibility in
connection with the transactions your commit
tee have inquired into. Mr.. Lea did not in
troduce Mr.. Bailey to Mr.. Russell, nor does
he state that he appointed for them place of
meeting, yet 1t happened that these two per-
sons did meet at the Var Department on the
same day that the interview between Mr.. Lea
and Mr.. Bailey occurred. Mr.. Russell says
this was between the 18th and 10th days of
last July. 1t was probably on the 18th day of
that month. The chief clerk of the War De-
partment, Secretary Floyd's most intimate
friend, Col. w. r. Drinkard, was the medium
through whom the introduction took place.
On that day they had their first interview at
the War Department. Col. Drnkard, as shown
by his own evidence, impressed Mr.. Bailey
with the belief that Mr.. Russell was gentle
man of great responsibility and pecuniary re-
sources, and that if the acceptances of the
Secretary of War were allowed to go to protest
he (the Secretary would be greatly agoniZed
and disturbed. Messrs. Russell and Bailey
held private interview in the third story
the Department and within few hours there
after Mr.. Bailey delivered to Mr.. Russell one
hundred and fifty thousand dollars of bonds at
the room OF the latter person in Washington
| city, and on the same morning the recipient
returned with them to New York. MIR. Rus
sell states that he left with Mr.. Bailey one
note of Russell, Majors & Waddel's in their
stead, as security. Ninety Of these one hun
dred and fifty bonds were Missouris, and the
rest Tennessees. Mr.. Russell does not recol-
lect, at first, whether or not the January cou-
ponS were on the bonds. but states that, subse-
quently, the most of the bonds were retired by
HIM in order to obtain those coupons 10
return to Mr.. Bailey, he Bailey
positive in his request to have them returned.
These coupons having been taken off, the
bonds were afterwards disposed of. The OBJ
ject was, CT course, to conceal the fraud
for if the coupons were hand it not
probable that the bonds would be demand
ed or inquired for
According to the statement of Mr.. Russell
there was no further correspondence or COM
muncation between Mr.. Bailey and himself
until the September following. At that time
he returned to Washington for the purpose of
obtaining others. An interview was held with
Mr.. Bailey, the result of which WAS that 3S7
bonds in addition to those first taken were
| transferred to Mr.. Russell on the following
day. The protection of the honor of Secreta-
ry Floyd, the necessity of providing for the
other acceptances as the bonds previously de-
ivered, and which were alleged to have been
| hypothecated were assigned as the reasons for
requiring further assistance. In this, as in
| the first instance, the paper of Russell, Ma
| Jors Waddell was left as security. Mr.. Rus
sell states that at this conference Mr.. Bailey
first Informed him that the bonds in his pos
session belonged to the Indian trust fund 1t
was the agreement that the bonds first taken
should lie returned within ninety days; but at
the second interview the time was extended
to the 4th of March, 1861. In October Mr..
Russell returned the South Carolina aud F FIor-
ida bonds, one hundred and forty or fifty, hav
ing ascertained that he cond not negotiate
| them. and North Carolina bonds were suhsti-
tuted in their stead. Mr.. Russell sgain ap-
| peared in Washington in December following,
| and on the grounds successfully relied up
| on before, viz the protection of the War De-
Qartment from sacrifice, he was enabled to OBJ
tain from Mr. Bailey three hundred and thir-
ty-three bonds, as an additional advance,
making the entire number distracted eight
hundred and seventy. From the bonds OBJ.
tanned on the second and third occasions, al
| ready referred 20, it is evident the January
coupons were cut off, as caution against de-
lection. Nine Tennessee coupons, belonging
to other bonds than those distracted, were
turned by Mr. Russell, doubtless because
the abstracted bonds had passed beyond Iii
reach. The transaction last referred to APP
pears to have closed the business relations
Of these two persons, so far. at least, as they
related to the abstraction of bonds.
BAILEY's MOTIVES FOR TAKING THE BONDS.
Why Mr.. Bailey distracted the bonds is
question to which your committee can present
!
sci were entire strangers previously to their
meeting at the War Department, neither the
obligations of friendship nor the suggestions
of kindly feeling seems to have prompted the
act. Mr.. Russell insists that money or
other valuable consideration ever passed to
Bailey, who confirms this statement in various
communications which have reached your
committee. 1t is not ascertained, ethsr, that
Mr. Bailey came suddenly into the possession
of any large amounts of money. His bank
| account was kept with Messrs. Riggs & Co.,
of Washington city, and Mr.. Riggs testifies
that between July and the 18th of December,
his deposits increased largely over former
ones, but amounted in the aggregate to not
| more than five or six thousand dollars. 1t is
true that this sum is a large one to be in the
| possession Of person. whose salary was but
$1,000 per annum, and who was supporting a
family, yet it would not, of itself, constitute a
| ground for grave suspicion, or afford clue
| to the discovery of the purposes of the ab-
straction. Mr. Bailey, in his conversation
with various witnesses stated, that his design
was to protect the character of Governor
Floyd, and TO save him from the dishonor and
retirement from the Cabinet that would be
necessarily incident to the protest and dis
covery of the acceptances which had been IL
legally issued 20 the firm OF Russell, Majors "
Waddell. Whether this consideration was
the sole motive of his canduct it is left to the
House TO determine. Your committee are,
however, constrained to express the convic-
tiong that behind the events that have been
made conspicuous, and beneath the exterior
of the transactions that have been described,
is purpose which, although successfully
hidden, was none tie less powerful and efic-
lent, and has given unity and vitality to the
schemes now partially exposed.
AoCEPrANcEs ISSUED by THE sEC'Y OF WAR.
| When the iniquitous act perpetrated by one
| of the subordinate officers of the Interior De-