New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1862-01-27


r;tee ever addre.sed 10 Mr. Clements, and tie one
which ie said by Mr.. Washbune to have been VIII
ten calling upon him Mr.. ClemenIsl for the eA'
pianat0n he tendered:'
"B,Rxur's HorEI. st. LOUIS, Oct u, lso'
"DFAR SIR an directed by the Committee Of the mouse
Of Repreeutatiyrs Of which the Hon {. h. VA ich u
hsral 20 scAuO led the rif Of ycul conutLi 1Iv
III tue COMMITTEE ~ every u,rhs IN Soui lONs', ~
itter would much obliged II you would iuiuish mem e.
your earliest convenience statement OF the number OF
hor e. PAchs'cd by the Quad"imi't" DerafHeu ~ W
cy since My ss'i Of WnoH pucn ttdi a. "ha ace esch
many mules lave been 30 pWchttd 10y the DepsttIei q
whom, aid hat price each e"d by whom tey nave oe"n
inspected what posi- ion hss been made Of them Gnd now
az aso irsrnc cd ,ay th't the Committee may fud
their inye atioOs eatD facilitated by na.rg from tiGr to
the assurance vi be reels sn'wered
''' "ThEo. +; andrews
CLERK TO Committee
AZ. w. c. CLEMENTS, esq"
1t will here be seen that the Committee only call
on Mr. Clements for certain stat teal information
from the Quartermatters books or hes' Is tnis
calling for the explanation he rendered" In his
letter
Ii will be further seen that no reply was made by
tie Committee TO the last clause of Mr.. Clemen'Ss
letter asking permission 10 see snd pernse such es-
uonv as the Committee had taken or should take.
| But. eays Mr.. Washbune, the Committee called
Mr.. Clements, and examined bin as a witness. 80
they did but they examined him in reference oily 10
.uch matters as they pleased by question AID answer
They doubtless allowed him to give az full replies
az he pleased TO their nerrogatorief, but the main
point of complaint still remains untouched This Is,
that Mr. Clements Was not sh0wn the testimony TINT
tttn bad been taken or was aierward taken, IN The
~ 10 qf.t,4Ia ad
By the Committee of those thugs which IN view Of
such testimony seemed to them to require explana-
ton; nor was he allowed 20 give or cause proper
explanations to be given respecting such testimony.
or the charges based upon it, against Gen.
McKinstry.
have said that the foregoing letter was the only
one that the Committee wrote TO Mr.. Clements.
let Mr.. Clements alter bis examination, wrote
the Committee second letter, dated some two VI
three days after the fret one reiteratng The request
made in his first letter to be informed by the Com
mittoe of whatever they wished to have explained
that lie might have such explanations made, not by
his own testimony alone, be it understood, but by
any other competent evidence needful for that pur-
pose. copy Of that second letter is not At hand
but it shall be produced if required. IL is sufficient
TO say il was never answered l. this fact denied
by Mr.. Washburnel
Mr.. Clements third letter TO the Committee wac
written several days after his examination 1t Is
follows:
l 81 LORI. oc, 2s 1861
To the Conparorai iar''iga,in0 Coanes .aiag al Bar.
nus.s AOfl, 81 Ioni.
GgsrLRsEy: again beg leave call 70 your attention The
request contained "a he Al clause o. NY letter your
the 18th October, inst. wherein asked in ,he
Geu Mchiu-ty in TIE field with tie amy, would allow
4 ia .faH.rk ff lfl o IaH
ccs. and pcne tho testimony taken bf,s your Conu,
relative The Clatermateis DtPs rneft here while under
10 tlst rcqoe,, sttough your attention hos once before
been cale1 70 the fact that you had scd - Loco IT, have
there repeat tie request and respectfully desire distinct
TeIly 10 the
Tod you 1tf.re .isi, upon inv,sgsiion with no
notice "a the ATTY nose doiugs he subject Of nye,
CATION something might be made to spp,. which might
u need e1plUson sud usDs character be be whom be
may be safe sgain secret cr JlTte r2su aons snd
especially where 20 hss been the here
eKansors have been in PAD Quoted a. The utnce OF
personal enemies Of Gen. Mckin,y, and with the
purpose ~ doing tim inluTy.
Partial etsush upon the subject Of an alleged sale Of
ceran animal. by one M Percy TO the Cos-Tnnent b.
caused it 20 be charged that IN that Psiioulsr Instance fraud
/ Dlon the Government wss perpotfs'ed
The evidence in existence aud can be given before you.
pros IA entire fahi,y OF that charge. The witD
hat effect ready 60 beiIe you and you shsl
nj he'd with item you viii inform me that such testimony
will be heard by sou.
il may be- although ignorant the subject that other
e..e yS' ronpy sylse me- Of The i.of Isf liz no'
spy ias ont RICH, which oanuot Juty .quitA
]
reque ted IL favor Of one who las been clothed with al i'm
poft4nt pablo trust wa Gen Ickinsy and who from
th nature Of h present duties has no opportunity TO tpP,s
Willie Gen. MsKinsiry challenge, the most searching Ell
Deuen.nt be has hight expect will be conducted
Win farmers and justly toward himse viii yon please place
this letter and two former the record Of
Your obelient servant
H. w. O. CLEMENF5
No reply was ever made by the Committee to this
letter. nor was Sir. Clements afterwsrd examined
before the Committee.
is this denied by Mr.. Washbune--and if not, how
WAS Mr.. Clements ever caied upon for tie erpio-
nations rohicL lie had rendered :"
He desired TO see aud read the whole testimony
This was refused him.
He asked to be permitted to explain all the
charges. This wac refused Lin.
/ lie further offered to diAproyc certain specified
charges, which he named. He was not allowed 10
produce bis evidence.
Is it true, tben repeat, tLat he Wa called upon
by the Committee g. for he explanations v4,ca he
had tsaderedi"
Let it be observed that the specific charges to
which Mr. Clements refers in his Lao, letter about
the " Peay" animals, AID which charge he offered
in that letter to dsprove, constitute one of the
very "CCusdIo.s hlHue ny uiIs Investigating
Committee against Gen. McKinstry in their
published report, us it was also one Of the charges
they made through their er-p0rte testimony to the
War Department, and under mAich Gen. Mekmstry's
arrest uas procured.
That Mr.. Clements did not offer to disprove every
charge which this Committee made against Gen. Ne
Kustry, was Only because their testimony wac taken
in secret, or porte, and was wholly unknown to him
excepting it partially aud InpeIfeoiy leaked out