The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-08-23

ats i1completed condition, and paying the tuu
amount specified in the contract while he could
be compelled by his contract to finish the en-
gine end erect it in vessel for TIE same amount
of money. This matter was up before the Re-
trenchment Committee just previous to the ad-
journment of Congress and before which Mr.
Allyn testified, and the committee not finishing
the investigation before the end of the session
introduced bill, which passed the last day Of
the session, stopping any payment to MIR. Cor
lss until the amount, if any, justly due him
was ascertained.
The following is the letter in which the
writer gives a synopsis of the whole facts in
the case, and sets forth charges against Chief
Engineer King of very serious character,
which will doubtless be Investigated
WASHINGTON, ID. G., Aug ~, 1slO-Nlce- Admiral
ID. ID. Porter Z. S. ~, Navy Department, Washing
ton, d. C-Sir:-I have been removed from the
position Of Chief Clerk OF the Bureau of Steam En-
ginetTing, not, am confident with your approval
but at the request or demand OF King, the chief OF
that bureau, and for the reason that was opposed
to his settlement of the Corss contract for steam
machinery, in relation to which testified before the
Joint Select Committee on Retrenchment
received my appointment some eight years since,
without soliciting the position and during that time
have served the Government and protected its in
terest to the best OF my ability. 1atter myself that
during the time have been in the department l
have saved the Government large amounts, one Of
which permit me to mention, as 1t is connected with
this matter. caused to be deducted from Mr.
$4,000 his bill sent to the bureau beng for SS2
OOo including and charging at the rate of forty cents
per pound (Which was to be the price for the in
creased weight OF the boiler proper for CRATE bars
doors, deck plates smoke stacks, and other iron
castlngs, worth out nve cehts per pound while the
weight rendered their bills correctly, and never
made claim for forty cents per pound for cast
iron.
opposed the settlement of the Corliss contract
in the manner in which it was made for the reason
that by taking the engines, etc, in their unc Jm-
pleted condition, and paying him St40,0O0, COriSS
would not only receive that amount as gratuity,
but that he would (as the testimony OF experts be-
fore the RetTeIchmeIt Committee cOnclusivey
show save the additional amount of about 800 900
that they testify that it would have cost Corliss to
complete his contract for the 100-nch engine, thus
receiving from the Government, without giving any
value, the sum OF s240,0U0
business man for making the best settlement he
could do assert that King, in engineering the set
tement for Corliss with the secretary, If so be the
Secretary had anything TO say about 1t or gave any
orders, did not protect the Government. And, in
passing would say that, from facts within my
knowledge am confident that you had nothing to
do with the settlement, and did not make the en-
dorsement on Corliss letter containing his propOsi-
tion, which purports to be yours and which you
testified before the committee to be forgery. The
action OF Congress in relation to this settlement OF
the Corliss contracts viz, prohibiting the payment
OF any moneys to him until competent board, after
thorough examination, shall decide what amount,
If any, is Justly due him, shows the opinion OF Seua-
tors and Representatives in relation to the settle
ment made 10y King.
AS stated by you before the committee it has never
been usual for the Secretary OF the Navy to examine
into the details of the settlement of contracts. He
relies upon the chief OF the bureau to examine and
10 recommend, and, in most cases. the recommends
ton of the chief of bureau is conclusive with the
Secretary hence, if the settlement tat the time
made was an improper one, the responsibility rests
upon King. IT, subsequent to the settlement and
the giving certificate OF Indebtedness the Secretary
has seen tit to the responsibility, that does
not relieve King but divides it between them.
know that King labored under great difficulty in
getting up his reply to the Senate resolution asking
for information in relation to the settlement OF Cor
liss contracts, for, by his direction, l drafted a
reply giving the actual facts; he objected to it, and
taking my draft as q basis, he made and subse-
Quently altered five different replies to the Senate
resolution before it was satisfactory to him, and
last one 1t took King six weeks to get his reply
into shape satisfactory to himself and the Secretary
And assert that he did consult Mr.. Corliss about
his reply; also, that King in quoting from the re-
port OF The board, insisted upou emitting the words
when completed"-that is, that 1t would cost Cor
! liss to complete the 100-inch engine $40 0O0-and
| erased those words in three Of the copies and nd
them rewritten. You can draw your own differences
| why he desired to suppress those words.
! notice that he says in his evidence before the
| Committee on Retrenchment that he never saw the
original report OF the board Of which Commodore
Strong was President but once and that was in your
office. / assert that statement TO be false. know
that he had the report for several days. and stated
to me that he had STUDIED 1t, and thought he un Ter
stood 1t that he had shown it to engineers, and he
also had one of the clerks Of the bureau make q
copy OF it,
! | address this communication to you Admiral
| that you may know the cause OF my removal. And
in this connection permit me to say that the manner
of removal was unusual in the Navy Department
for instead of granting a short leave at the expra
ton OF which requested to tender my expiration OF
stating that my services were no longer required
the letter was drafted by King, and copied for hiH
by an engineer, and worded for a peremptory dis
missal, and by him taken to the Secretary for his
signature. This unusual course was taken by King
to crafty his petty spite, thinking that it would
| annoy me-and it would II 1t had been done by
gentleman. But he failed in his purpc Sc: it is MOI
| in his power to annoy me.
do not address you with any desire to be rein
stated for 1t was my intention several months since
to resign, but my friends In and out OF the depart
| ment, demonstrated against my doing so. woulC
| not again be in the same bureau with King. l have
| come in contact with him as long as ] have He Ii
ignorant lacks intellect; his memory is tTeacherous
he is controlled by his preudices; and In my opinion
is utterly unfit 10 I'LL the position OF chief OF thu
! Bureau Of Steam Engineering.
As chief OF tie bureau he has discretionary powe
| 10 eXpend one million dollars OF public money dur
ing the present fiscal year. l assert, from my know
ledge OF him, that he has not the business capacity
| to eXpend it judiciously.
One would suppose that any man possessed o
selfrespect after reading your testimony before th
| Committee on Retrenchment in relation TO King
would forthwith tender his resignation; but he I
not the man to resign. He procured the position by
| treaehery to member OF the Engineer Corps-whi
is, in every way, his superior-and will hold on a
long as possible.
extended 20 me during your official connection witt
the department, l am, very respectfully, you
obedient servant, WM. III. ALLYN
Following this, the writer of the letter sub
mits the evidence of Vice-Admiral Porter an,
himself, taken before the Retrenohment Com
mittee, in July, to substantiate the charges
The matter will create considerable sensation
here before Congress at its next session