New-York daily tribune., 1861-08-17
THE ALLEGED CLOTHING FRAUDS
@ssiYSsk OF TIE INSPECTORS TO TIE REPoRT
oP TIE SELECT COMMITTEE or TIE MILL

, |
Inc Military Board seems determined to earn an
uneuyiabe fame in connection with this matter II Ara
makes disgraoefal contract, and then attemrss d,
ssten upon others the responsibility OF ia own ao,s
The1eport OF Its Select Committee lately published
il labored and most Ssngenuous effort TO excul,sts
the Board and 70 prove that Brooks Brothers and tb,
Inspectors are the guilty parties. The effort will not
succeed The material facts easily established
and point too clearly the culpsbihy Of the Board
be perverted or even obyured BY any amount OF spo.
sa.l pleading Hsstaensut.
The undersigned have aiready poofshed card ia
vScation of their official coaduct inspectors o. .h
clothing furnished Under this contract IN that cSra'
they made no charges against Others, bnt confined
themselves 60 simple statement cf tie ficss connected
with their own duty, aud the manner In winch 10 was
performed Conscious Of the entirs truthfs'ness Of
their statement they could not anticipate that aay ono.
and least OF all the Military Board, would venture TO-
challenge lie correctness by renewing against them the
charge of unfaitbfnlness In this they were mistaken
The Board has less farness and less prudence thse
shey gave it credit cr la the report Of It's Ssec Com
mee the charges are distinctly usde that tbs contract
was not faithfully executed and that the inspectors
culpsby remss 10 the performsnce OF their dnfy
| These charges thu-r renewed In official dccu-'
ment cannot pass uncbalienged TIE inspectors Eaow
them to be gronndless and they "a to themselves
to place before the publct the evidence Of that feet
II this evidence shall prove injurious to the reputation
Of this Board. it must charge is publication 10 the
trnecs aud indi-creon OF ito Select ComIDittee. The
inspectors present in sefdeisnse and due 70 ts
public.
A copy Of the contract with Brooks Bros is hero
with submitted; also certificates from their foreman,
and from the highly respectable commission houses
furn ah tha ed of Theas
documents alone completely eSculpate the nspecto
from the charges OF the Select Ccnmitee. They
prove beyond cav that tLe contract called for various
styles and quscs Of goods, all at the price Of $g %
per uniform that the contractors furnished the iden-
Teal goods they agreed TO- and that the uniforms
well made, and the workmen literally paid therefor
In word they prove that the contract was faithfully
executed and the goods properly Inspected
Here tho matter might be safely left to the Judgment
of an intelligent community. Bat the inspectors feel
called upon TO probe the subject deeper. There Is
general and wel-gronnded conviction that some wrong
has been committed on the patriotic volunteers in
nection with this contract and il is proper tue pubs
should know .hrough whose instrumentality II has
been done. The following facts known 10 the Select
Committee bat frankly and fairly stated p shcr
report WILL It believed furnish the needed ipforoa
ton:
On the 2a day of April the Military Board published
a notice Inviting bids for IL 900 uniforms. Without
waiting for the competition that such notices tn
tended elicit the Board the or following day
accepted the bid Of Mr. Robert Freeman made is
behalf Of Brooks Bros, for the whole number VI
uniforms, at $l9 80 each, to be made ef all-woci
Rersey Of the style aud quality used in clothing the
| u. s. Army.
Brooks Bros. upon being informed Of the acceptancs
Of this bid proceeded purchase all the army Kerseys
then on ths market, and, hndng the quantity largely
deficient at spprsed the Board Of the fact. The
Board responded by appointing one Of It's members.
Mr. Dorsheimer committee 20 confer with them on
tho subject The conference took place, Mr.. Dor
sheimer being aided by the InspectorC eneral and 70
some extent, by Mr.. Thurow Weed. IL resulted In
the selection aud adoption Of eight different styles Of
goods az follows viz:
Like sample No. !, s,a0 dus bIue Ker'ey Jaetsts
LiIc sample No g sloo esrk biue Ess I,cte';
Like ..mpis No. l. 400 dark blue Ker.sy Trowserx
Like Like :s%B: :sB. No No. . sS s!.si .ns
10 sample No . 400 400 brown mi.sd Oye,cosi.
Like sample No. g. 1900 niirsd Ksney 0vsroosis.
Like sample No o, 1000 Cadet mixed Dosskin OyercOss
These goods, thus substituted for the all-woo army
cloth on which the bid of sI9 30 per sui, pred-
Gated Mr. Dorsbeimer entered into written contract
for, without asking any abatement Of price, and tho
Board approved his action, although s members might
have learned from any drygoods clerk thai the mate
rial thus contracted for bad little than half the
market value Of that ON which tho bid was made.
STYLES Nos and 4, of which there were Is 100 gar
ments cost less than half the price of Army Kersey.
So any one acquainted with dry goods could have told
them that Felt Cloths" unfit for army clothing
The scarcity OF military goods at the time this con-
tract was made may afford some excuse for the adop-
ton of these inferior qualities; but II cannot be offered
in justification OF tho BOs:ds agreement to pay Zoe
them the price asked for the best Here 10 precseY
where the wrong on the volunteers was committee.
The Board contracted for good medium and inieror
ooods ALI at a price that would have been liberal 'or
the hes, and Il got precisely what it barganed fof.
If,be Select Committee will address itself TO the task
of giving satisfactory explanations Of this pnnceT
bety Of the Board at the expense Of the volunteers.
II will do itself more credit and be more likely TO meet
public expectation, than by vain efforts through star
chamber proceedings to fssien on others the poohs
odium Justly excited by the msdeeds Of the Board
The public would alec like sn explanation OF the
Comm,tees reasons for emitting TO state the important
fact that the Board had already compromised win,
Brooks Brothers, BY their agreeing to furnish gratuit-
ously $50 additional suitsnot for any unfaithfunes
ON their part in executing the Contract but because ts
hberaity Of its provisions enabled them to AFFORD IT.
and because the Board threatening to repudmte It's
own contract they could not otherwise obtain the
balance due them. In n word, why did the Select
Committee recommend that the $4,000 due Rrcoka
BROTHERS should be withheld, when il knew tha Board
had already compromised with them for less than hall
that sum It will not venture 70 say that the report
Il