New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1864-12-29

Is carbines sf $3.50 nat u VIII WIZ. w yttch there
Thsn tbs, ss7 900 IN ths claim the Price
you paid to Narstcn TO dollar anu cen Won Maid
Yon ssy here that the difference was c.u.ed by
a s,tices being charged In the inventory at oTer
price and you rase example the model gSH wniGa
pas charged at 900 although you paid t3oco ior ~
Did YOU make such statement TO the Conmittee. a.
t . Did you pay $4,000 Cor the model CUNT A. No.
q How came Won 10 say So them A. had that in
nv mind as the amount that had paid for the model
onD. from the discussions which Ne had az TO the ap
prsisemeDt as to tho value Of the model gum had the
5000: had the entory there but did not refer TO
Il in regard 20 that item, because II appeared 10 pc
40 familiar TO my mind the invenorysh0ws II 70 De
900
o. In your short deposition you say There was
large engine turning lathe not charged IN the schedule
as there was dispute whether II was sold to MT
! Farley or was still owned by Mr.. Marston' By
schedule there do yop the schedule presented
TO the Board A. Yes sir; did not soy that tits the
item Of s325 in the schedule tbink during the prog
ress Of the trial Mr.. Marson called nv attention 10
that item and said slould not be in our claims went
and told Mr.. Blunt wanted TO be examined about that
item and told him that in consideration OF me que
tion Of title 10 tlst u s?nd NOT nave Deeh pu' A'0 n'
O. Was not this deposition read over to you before
you signed ~ 4. Yes. sir; II reads ihef9 yW !"
large engine urning lathe not charged In the schedule
have been charged in the schedule
O. Did you bayc j. stru" o.. OF the scheduled 4
NO did pot, Nj rRt was ndgc ga'I he tns de sa
get he money for,it. "
The witness was examined infinitely a. 70 en-.
tries on the cash book, and stated that the
showed everything in the inventory except TWO itoms-
one of $500 10 himself for salary and s2Uo caimea
PaTret; it produced an authentic DOCK ioi ,ne
outlay in the concern as far ~ went; II SHOWS ro
o. WAS II prodnoed as evidence that the manufacture
Of the guns bad cost the amount claimed rom the cy
BY Of a T w snS ih indicate
q Was there any disbursement made BY Opdyke OF
Mcneil in this business that did not enter into the claim
corn began until It destroyed A. All the oitisys
and liabilities entered into my consideration OF the cot
as presented in The claim.
q. You said you considered that sn fonett NODE VI
making the claim A. Yes.
i O. Before this claim was presented was any other
method Of making up tie claim on me pIinoiPhe 81
attempted A. Yes, we tried don't know that II
resulted in awnings we talked over the matter Erea,
deal and examined the books, ana iounu diHicui't AZ
o. Was there suy principle Of making up tho claim
against the city that should cover Gil the money Air.
Opdykc out Of pocket and nothing elsef A. IL was
talked about not cxecy tha'i covering all his costs
and liabilities contracts: not what be was out oil
pocket but what the out Of pocket was
talked about between myself and Mr. Opd!ke ana MI
Keen. ..a..o
carbines DESTROYED Who frat suggested that principle
Of charging Government price. and deduoiing what
woud cost to furnish themi A Mr.. Loring Jones nrst
suggested il.
o. What was hi. sson for that way A. I recol.
lect particular ieasJn lie gave. eIcep, mai hst "s
a proper and fair way; told him would consider ~
had a conye rsation with Mr. Opdyke in regard to IL
don't recoloct what lie said more than his concur
renee in the reasOnhbleness and propreiy OF II; we
both considered there ought to appear up 70 tat .me
some profit the guns We had put on the G0veID'
uent price. which covered all the proh'.
O. Did that strike you RS an honest mode OF present
ing the eccountl a. II did. in connection with the
Il that the property destroyed, and no further
guns could be turned ont OF that establishment.
@ Had you ever thought Of II before Loring Jones
suggested iti A. do not think had.
| Q. Had Mr.. Opdyke ever suggested it before ron
talked TO him sbout ti ~ don't think lie had.
pa ordyks tell Won Lorng Jcns; s had ,a h Ha
not he NAV; I told him Ioring Jones had suggested H.
! Q. You slated thrt "Mr Opdyke said wo should be
exceedingly cautious to get it below, raer than above
the actual cost" When it lie used that language
to yoal A: 1t was during the progress Of making up
the claim be rsg ssde on two anu a'''
o. When The claim was finished was Il shown TO Mr.:
Opdykef A. presume i WAS before y as esnt 10.
in dc,aii and Mr. Paret 10 bis making accurate eI
tracts from the cash book Mr. Keen made up the car.
tine claim at his house, he got the computation OF
ynrioas psr,s at his holse snd made 1t in pencil saw
The process after Nj Keen arrived at his conelusion
O. The carbine claim as Won presented u 20 ,he clt!
includes the full you would have received from the
Government at the contract price. less the spscc ex
pense 10 complete the guns, o. e1pllnedf a. Ace
O. On that mode o. payment would not the entire
ROYALTY for the whole 100 guns have been received II
Won had collected The claim as you had Prest ed A
j O. AZ the price you claimed would YOU not have COL
lected ROYALTY on the whole that was due aud De-
7 longing to the patenteet A. Yes, slr.
z o. Ifyou hsl collected al the ROYALTY that belonged
10 him why did yOu not pay IL 10 him when be de'
e manded III A. We did no1 collect 1T they Cut down
t our claim that Is The on, difference. IN -.
Q. And the outing down OF that claim you p' s'9 Oh
# the royalty a. Yes cir.
: O. Why did you not give him al the royalty except
the 900 that had been cut DOWN. A. For the reason
that stated 10 him a. It appeared oin our Own pay
pens and advances that would make nothing Oh t1e
contract and really any prof. We would have mace
yould have been the balance Of che $1,000 ard
ttought wa right and fair be should share the loss
q THE result Was tba. he collected - 900 whom his
claim $1,000; you had collected the whole and
he lost 81 900 the royalty by that dockingf A. les
sir; used argument in adjusting the matter. that
tho city had cut claim DOWN and beevc1 az the
claim was presented. the Supervisors mutt have taken
II of the guns and f theTmore it appeared by our ac
counts thst we ONT about and " any forfeit
lad been made II would be Oh ire guns subsequently
: 10 be deiiy
= O. Did You give LIN 20 understand that by paying
him 900 that would MAKE you conc out about even
o. You dld paw Mcneil an item OF profit A. yes.
sir; think about .s.h Of November last II was paid
on the principle OF Ml. Opdyke and self conceoing
ali the proft.-ppon the prineiDc of giving him tie
profits Of the whole concern.
4 q. How much was allowed as profit Of the concern
mater by .Mr. OpAyts that night and h. found
further proH Of 81 80 by examining the check book
there was loan by Opdyke 10 Brooks construed a. an
was matter between him and Brooks. which should
not 10 counted In the expenditure.
| Witness was crossexsm;ned at length 80 .hs
items in the profit and loss accounts of Annoy. Which
was published In Yesterdays paperl
lsfZt Ia ii haNtn Ia