Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1868-12-30
swINDLING UNCLE SAM.
Sacrifice of Governments Property
Probable RRseaIity In the War De
pariment.


Sacrifice of Government Property
Probable RaseaIiIy In the War De
Psriment.
The Washington correspondent
of the New York Herald writes:
The country has been entertained
for many months past with rich
revelations concerning frauds in the
Treasury, POstoffice and Interior
departments; but since the question
who made the most money in the
Ordnance Bureau quoted down, and
who did the most profitable business
in paying the bounties to colOred
troops has been hushed up, very lit
tie in relation to frauds in the War
Department has appeared. Now the
War Department comes in again for
charges of questionable dealing, if
not of downright fraud. This time
the Quartermaster's Bureau is the
scene of operations. There is a
good deal of difficulty encountered
in ascertaining the exact facts in the
case, but what little is known is
enough to show very clearly that
certain officers of the army have
either been guilty of premeditated
fraud or gross mismanagement, or
else they have been grossly wrOnged.
The facts, so far as they are known,
are as follows: In July and August
last Forts C. F. Smith and Reno, in
Montana Territory, were abandoned
and the United States property was
sold at auction. 1t is contended by
many persons who are well ac-
quainted with affairs in that country
that the order to abandon those
forts created no little surprise, as
the necessity for their continuance
was then, and is yet, just as great
as when they were established.
The order, however, was. is
sued, and advertisements, it
is said, were published in several
Western papers, announcing that
the buildings and other public prop
erty at these forts would be sold to
the highess bidders on or about
the 1st of June. Those who dwelt
in the vicinity of these posts were
we'll aware of the value of the pub
lie property there, and its worth
was variously estimated at from
100000 to 100000. One indi-
vidual, believing that in order to
settle up affairs rs speedily as pos
sible the officer in charge would
probably sell the property at .
large sacrifice, went to the General
commanding and offered him $40,
600 for the whole concern at Fort
Smith. The General gave him en-
couragement to expect that his offer
would be accepted. When the per
son who made the offer came, few
DAYS later, to close the bargain and
pay a portion of the money, the
General informed him that he could
not dispose of the property at pri
vate sale, and when he spoke to
him about it before he was not
aware that the property was already
advertised for sale at auction. When
the day of sale arrived no bidders
appeared, and the accounting of
ficer took the responsibility ofPost-
poning it for about ten days AT
the expiration of that time very
small group of persons were as
sembled, considering the great value
of the property for sale and the
large number of people in that part
of the country who needed just
such materials as were sold. The
absence of bidders was an indica-
ton that there was a screw loose
somewhere, and it was intimated
that that the loose screw was in the
feeble manner in which the an
nOuncement of the sale Twas made.
Only one bidder could be found
and all the public property at Fort
Smith, estimated to he worth nearly
100000, was knocked down to the
single bidder for $500. This prop
erty consisted of several buildings,
one steam saw mill, one water mill,
saw and grist; large quantity of
clothing, camp and garrison equip
page, quartermaster's stores, stoves,
etc. The steam mill sold for fifty
dollars and the other articles in pro
portion. The only explanation for
this alarming sacrifice of public
property is that the forts had to be
abandoned, as the troops had to be
withdrawn, and the country was filled
with hostile Indians. The sale was
advertised as extensively as possible
for three months before it occurred.
There is no law authorizing ac-
counting officers to sell United
States property in any other way
than by auction, and that if the
property had not been sold at that
time it would have been necessary
to destroy it to prevent the Indians
from obtaining possession. The
property at Fort Reno was sacrificed,
it is alleged, in the same manner,
and the lucky purchaser, nOtwith-
standing the hostility OF the Indians,
took eft the bargains and realized to
the tune of 100000.