Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1871-01-23
NO. 10.

somewhere, and as no residence could be
shown elsewhere in the United States, they
might, by fiction of law, be considered as
residents of the towns to which they were
assigned-it not being explained that the very
certificate sought was the prerequisite of
| such assignment.
Delany asserts that the assignment of these
men to the credit of towns was refused by the
Adjutant General, without authority from
Washington. and that he procured such
authority in the form of an order from Provost
Marshal General Fry to credit the names
enumerated in the list to districts and sub
districts in the State; and that after the
receipt of that order credits were made to
such towns as he had negotiated with for the
men.
THE FARwELL LOT.
The assignment of some sixty or more men,
whose names were originally borne on the
Heath lists but who not having been taken up
by the certificates of towns as residents there
Of were for a while classed as General Ma
val credits" to the towns of Sidney, Nor
rldgewock, Mercer, Starks and others, in per-
formance of contracts made with those towns
oy A. b: Farwell, and for which men Farwell
was paid, was perhaps the transaction which
mas excited more comment and suspicion than
any other connected with these credits.
Mr. Farwelrs own explanation of his con-
necton with this distribution has been nut be-
fore the public in various forms. 1t will be
found succinctly stated in his communication
to the Portland Advertiser dated Oct. s, 1869;
and at more length in his answer to interroga-
tories in his deposition taken by us. He saws
that he went to Washington, d. c., taking
with him only private letter from Governor
Cony, introducing him and his business, and
while in that vicinity procured and caused to
De mustered into the army, a number of men
not varying ten from seventy five, part of
| which he enlisted himself, part of which he
bought of other recruiting agents and part of
which were transferred to him by man whose
name he suppresses, he advancing their boun-
ties and taking their receipts therefor.
tie says the muster rolls Of all these men
were either sent by mail or brought by him.
self to the Adjutant Generals Office in Angus
ia, and that in case of all the men whose re-
| ceipts and enlistment papers he did not him.
self bring, they were assigned by the State
authorities to the State at large or to the
towns of their residences respectively. He
says he had advanced as State bounties and
premiu for these men $50, 900, and over
$50, 900 more than was reimbursed to him in
the sale and. assignment of such as he was al
lowed to control. Complaining to the State
authorities of this considerable loss, they final
ly arranged to reimburse him by allowing him
to take some sixty or more men from the
general credit" list and sell them to towns,
by which he was enabled to indemnify himself
for his said loss. After this arrangement was
agreed upon, he asserts that the Governor
burnt the original receipts in his private room
in the State House, of all the men who had
been assigned, as he says to the general credit
of the State or of the towns of their residen-
ces, to none of which had a bounty been paid
by the State.
This statement, although asseverated and re-
peated-by man who has largely enjoyed the
friendship of eminent public men and the conf
dence of his fellow citizens, is contradicted by so
many facts and circumstances, that we find our
selves compelled, in determining what our testi-
mony proves, to state in order the reasons for
dstrusting it.
With the most strenuous purpose to credit Mr..
Farwell. we should be perplexed to determine
which Mr.. Farwell, the one who fresh from the
event, in February, 1865, made a statement be-
fore the legislative investigating committee,
which was taken down in writing by Hon. Ma
than Webb, or the one who more than six years
after the event snbscrbes and swears to the tes-
timony taken before us. In the former he stated
that he had commission from the Adjutant
General and procured all his men under that
authority. In the latter he sWears that he re-
fused to take a commission from the Adjutsnt
General and to be considered recruiting officer,
and only had letter from the Governor. In the
for men and $3.50 for personal substitute. In
the latter he testi6es that he paid maximum of
$500 for men and $3.50 for personal substitute
In the former he relates that of 80 or 80 men, all
but twelve or twenty were men already in the
navy on board two different war vessels whose
enlistng papers he had bought. In the latter he
makes oath that the whole number, not varying
10 from rs. were enlisted and mustered into the
army in the vicinity of Washington. In the for
mer he plainly implies that he bought the en-
listment papers of Stimson's, Gasln's, Emery's
and Manley's men. In the latter he admits that
he bought only Emery s and Manley's men, and
it is otherwise proved that he did not buy Stim-
sons. In the former he makes no complaint of
missassignment or loss of men. He was so sue
cessfu that he had men to spare, and after gen.
erously donating ten or fifteen men which the
Adjutant General assigned for political purposes
at his written request, he sold what be had left
so as to get back what he paid out and little
more. In the latter he complains under oath
that he lost some SO or 60 men by the missassign-
ment Of the State authorities, and more than
$50 900 which he had disbursed for them more
than what he got back by sale and payment,
and that the State authorities repaid this loss
by turning over to him 60 or more men from the
general naval credits.
1t is difficult to reconcile these two statements
or to make them appear like veritable recitals of
sold by Farwel to the towns of Sidney, Mercer,
Winthrop, Starks, Norridgewock and Greene,
were taken out of the category of general naval
credits, where they first stood, and put to the
credits of these towns, either in the manner that
Delany effected his assignment of the same class
of men. or in the manner the 25l list was
assigned Of which we speak next
THE TWO HUNDRED AND rIrrY-oNs
| The names contained in the 25l list, and
claimed to be the names of recruits in the navy,
although assigned by the State authorities to
some 30 towns, seem to have been regarded az
the property of J. H. Manley, and were probably
bought by him of some persons connected With
and referring to John F. Heath. We desired to
obtain the testimony of Mr.. Manley himself as to
this list, but have been disappointed. Perhaps
however there is as much light thrown upos the
acquisition, distribution and sale of this number
of men as upon any other class Of suspicious en-
listments. We have the testimony Of Mr.. Sim
mons, partner of j. p. Deering & Co., substan-
tiated by the books of the firm, who sold over
100 of them; o fragment of Manley's statement
before the legislative committee Of 1865; and q
copy of apaper which will be annexed to his re-
port, which Gen. Hodsdon thinks shows the
actual distribution Of men to these towns.
1t appears that the list containing the men