The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-01-30
SATURDAY, JANUARY 80, 1869.


Hnittee OF the House Of Representatives 70
Investigate certain charges against the eng
neers of tina Philadelphia Navy Yard. Judge
Kellev vss chairman of the subcommittee
and ths RAPPORT presents the evidence upon
,vbiob bs grounded his denunoistion OF the
Fn0inser Corps OF the Navy in general, and
Chief Engineer Zeller in particular, few
yrAeks aeo. in the House. We have now be-
fora MS the report of the Board Of Engineers
appointed by the Navy Department and the
report Of Judge Keley's committee, upon
which 10 make some estimates as to the merits
of tho case under consideration. Notwith-
standing all this display of testimony on both
sides, however, there are some matters still In
considerable doubt. Chief Engineer Zeller
has claimed that the investigation OF the sub
committee was partial, and that 1t did him in
justice; he has therefore appealed to the full
Naval Committee, and Is now presenting addi-
tionsl evidence as to the righteousness OF the
purchases of tools made for the Navy Yard,
and for the purpose Of vindicating his own
integrity. We await the publication Of the
final REPORT Of the Naval Committee before
coming TO any definite conclusion as to the
merits of the case.
The facts, as we have them, are that Chief
Engineer zsller purchased in New York
number Of second hand marine engine tools
in preference to purchasing new ones in Phila-
dephia. He claims that the tools were bought
at a bargain, that they are in reasonably good
order, and that they are capable of doing
the heaviest marine engine work as well as
any machines made. Judge Kelley's cem-
mittee, on the contrary, contend that the tools
are old.fashioned, out of order, and suoh as
would not be admitted into any frst-class
machine shop in the country; and they further
contend that Mr.. Zeller did not allow the
Philadelphia manufacturers an opportunity to
compete, and that either he or his assistants
Fabricated bids from those firms, 80 as to
make it appear as il they competed in regular
form, and were ruled out on account of their
excessive charges.
With regard to the merits of the tools, the
subcommittee gives as the testimony Of
Mr.. J. Shields Wilson, superintendent OF
Esafe & Lsvy's Penn Works, and Mr.. John
Birkbeck, superintendent OF Messrs. Merrick &
Sons Southwark Foundry, six machinists
employed in the navy yard, all OF
whom testify in substance that the tools pur-
CHASED in New York are old fashioned, out of
order, incapable of doing frst-rate work, and
not auoh as they would buy il fitting up shops
of their own.
On the other hand, the Board of Engineers
who examined the matter by order of the
Navy Department present the evidence Of
o number Of prominent machinists, who swore
that the tools were not antiquated;
thst the depreciation from use was not such
40 to materially affect their efficiency; that
they were frst-class tools in every respect,
such % they would purchase themselves, and
shat IL was iudicious to purchase them in pre-
ference to paying higher price for new ones.
The following are the gentlemen who testified
TO that efect:-John Il. Long, Chief Engineer
OF the United States Navy; Joseph G. Harrison,
OF the firm Of Fletcher & Harrison, New York;
Joseph Belknap, consulting engineer, New
York; Jacob S. Worden, Of the firm Of Murphy,
MoCady & Worden, New York; Thomas J..
Rowland, of the Continental Iron Works,
Grsenpoint, L. l.; John Birkbeck, superin-
tsndent Of MerriCk & Sons, Philadelphia, and
seventeen other leading maohinists and engi-
nsers of New York and other cities. In addition
70 those, letters endorsing the same views were
received from Messrs. Merrick & Sons; w. C.
Williamson, of Williamson & Brothers 4.
Wilbraham Il Brothers, John Birkbeck, John
L. Knowlton, of the machine works at Second
street wharf, Philadelphis; Lewis Laws, OF l.
p. Morris, Towne Il Co., Philadelphia; Wash
ington Jones, superintendent Of the same esta
blishmsnt; Charles W. Smith, No. l35 NORTH
Third street; and Robert II. Long, of Grice 8
Long, Fulton Works, Philadelphia.
Suoh is the array Of testimony on bott
sides. "Where doctors disagree, who shal
dsoidst'' The most important evidence IL
that of Mr.. John Birkbeck, whose evidenct
before the Committee and the Board is appa
rently contradictory. Before the Board hi
testified that "the general character Of the
tools purchased Of Roach is excellent, and they
have all the modern improvements for doing
marine work; they are not old-fashioned
patterns, and they are generally in good order
there are some few repairs required on them
20 put them in the best Of frst-class order
the cost Of putting them in order would mo-
exceed 5000; they are the proper kind of tool
to select for navy yard, and their purchase
was judioious, instead Of purchasing othei
tools at greater prices" Mr.. Birkbeck stated
that when examined by the subcommittee ht
was required to give categorical answers, which
Ala mt alioit his full opiniou