The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1862-07-04

| "IHURsDAY, March b.
| "C1aaus of B. F. Moodcy & Co., $500, 6,30l.
'sLisut: Col. T. p. Andrews payinaster in til;
army, called on part of the Government by j
r. Shepley, Esq.
sQuestions by Mr.. Shepley. VIII you please
| state what rank you hold how long you have
served in the army; and what is your present
post Of duty
ANSWER hold the rank of lieutenant col
| oneI have served in the army nearly forty
years am the senior Of the two deputy pay
master generals and l am at present at the
| head of the pay departmentin the department
| of Missouri.
"Questions by Mr.. Sheply. Col Andrews
hold in my hand en- authority given by Gen
cavalry, authorizing him to clothe and equip
| his regiment. VII. YOU please state whether
OF not Gen. Fremont hos any authority to con-
tract for ordnance and ordnance stores?
sAnswer. He had none unless under an ex-
press power from the secretary Of War.
'.Questions by Mr.. Shepley. Is there any.
thing in the law or regulations OF the army au-
thorizing the commanding general to contract
for mules, horses, or forage?
"Answer I know of none. The quarter.
master is the proper person to make these con-
tracts.
"Questions by Mr.. Shepley. If the command
ing general deems fortiications necessary at a
particular place. in whom is the authority to
contract for their construction?
."Answer. Fortifcations have never been,
to my knowledge, contracted for except in st.
Louis. The materials are contracted for, and
the construction has always been under the di-
rection of the engineer department proper.
s"Queston by Mr.. Shepley. Do you know
any reason, or did YOU ever hear the late con-
manding general of this department. give any
reason, why the rules and regulations of the
army were thus disregarded2
"Answer. was overwhelmed of any, nor
was there any obligation on his part TO give nfe
the information.
mandins general ever make to you any remarks
showing that he knowingly violated any OF
the laws and regulations OF the War Depart
ment
ANSWER He did on one occasion, in my
office, make remarks showing that he intended
to disregard the ordinary Instructions and regu-
lations Of the department at Washington,
"Queston by Mr.. Shepley. Can you repeat
the substance of these remarks
"Answer / can. This conversation was late
in August or the early part OF September
G en-. Fremont came into my office with Gen.
McKinstIy, and after Gen. MckinstIy left he
commenced the conversation without anything
calling for it that am aware of. lie spoke
pleasantly, but said, the people OF the United
States were in the field; thai he ,eas at Their
head !. that he meant 10 carry out such measures
as they (the people, enpected him to carry out.
withom regard 10 the red tape Of the Washing
ton people.'-My only reply was in a few gen.
eral words, that as well as | could understand
the term red tape meant system of govern
ment, which in its details, might be carried too
far by subordinates, but had always been OF
The opinion that our general system was wise
and GOOD one, and that he who undertook to
set its principles or general details aside would
sooner or later become entanged in difficulties
by disregarding all system. lie replied by re-
peating his general remark, Qor | think the
third time, Fhas the people we're in The field, and
that he was at their head, and would have eu-
ergthing done according to their expectations
from hin saying. noW zoe h1re only extra
Constitutional government no c,ua rights, so
to speak all ordinary peaceful rules tcere 10
be set aside, and all This thing of sred tape
must gipe apay rery shortly to what the people
required of him had previously disobeyed
Gen, Fremont, by resisting an order OF iis
which considered was unauthorized by law,
and concerning which gave my testimony be-
fore the Congressional committee. General FIRE.
mont, had never been in my office, nor has he
been there since. He had no business to trans
act with me that morning
The declarations of General Fremont, as de-
posed to by Colonel Andrews, were of so as
founding character that we felt it to be our
duty to inquire if they had been made to others,
with view of ascertaining how far the annun-
citation of such revolutionary sentiments might
have superinduced the Generalization of the
service which cur Investigations have satisfied
us so extensively prevailed i'll this department.
We therefore examined Major Chauncey G. L.
Johnston, paymaster in the regular army, and
find his statements of sufficient Importance to
Justify us in giving them, unabridged, like
those of Colonel Andrews, place i'll our re-
port
Chauncey G. p. Johnston, called by J. II.
Shepley, associate counsellor, testified as fol-
lows:
81 am paymaster in the United States army
was appointed last june, and stationed in the
department OF the west.
''Question. Did the late commanding Cen
eral in this department ever in your presence
countenance any disregard of law, or the reSS-
ulations governing tho arlnyi
"Answer, General Fremont countenanced
1t frequently in my presence, aud to me, by
saying that he did not int5I in the admir- istra-
tion OF this department, TO be governed by the
rules and regulations that we're Ia,d down, aud