The New York herald., 1871-09-07
WASHING ON.
The Facts Regarding the Bar
ing Brothers Affair.
How That Firm Has Bees Cerryins on Busi.
ness with TIC United States
Statistics Of the Dead Letter
+ ONCE.

WASHINGTON, Sept Q. 1871.
Sns Facts Abeus the Barring Brothers. Affair.
The statement published to-day concerning
Messrs. Barring q Co., United States bankers at
London. was written at the Department OF State.
under the immediate supervision OF the Secretary,
who has been very uneasy ever since tho appearance
OF An article which purported to assign the cause
for the transfer Of the government funds nom these
gentlemen to the house OF Henry Clews 4 Co.. OF
New York. or Cews. Habicht & Co.. Of London
This semtoflcial document Of Mr.. Fish tacitly adj
mits the fact stated in the article TO which his is
q reply, that In 1861 or 1852. when Secretary
Seward overdrew upon Messrs. Barring Brothers
4 Co. to the extent Of 100000, that they i'm.
mediately sen. member Of the firm or an agent TO
Mr.. Seward TO know about the payment Of that
amount. This quasi admission by Mr.. Fish gives
additional weight to the allegation and substantially
attests 1t as fact. The statement made In the
article referred to, that Aessrs. Barring Brothers
Co. have not only disbursed the moneys placed in
their hands and transacted their duties entirely
to the satisfaction Of the Secretary Of State,
will not be accepted by the public as
the reason for change In our bankers, and
the records Of the Treasury Department Will not
sustain his allegation that frequently they have
made payments on account OF the United States
when the government had NO funds in their hands.
On the contrary there has not been q time during
the last ten years that these bankers did have
United States funds IN their possession. In the very
cited, where 1t Ia stated that the bankers had
paid June So 1871, in excess OF the deposits by the
government to the amount OF f12,3ss the
facts are tnat they had at least fifty
thousand dollars or government money IN
their hands on that day. The Off1cial figures at
the Treasury Department show this. During the
n q lQat hev hav hod of
least one hundred thousand dollars constantly on
hand from which to pay the drafs OF tine United
States of1cers, and very often 1t has amounted to
double that sum. These funds drew no interest,
and In some instances they accumulated for O long
space Of time. Mr.. Fish should have consulted tho
figures before he gave publicity to such state.
ment. During 1883 ana 1854 these bankers held
very large sums OF our money, and there was no
tear OF our overdrawng, for In the former year
government borrowed OF them -, 600. 600, which
they agreed TO lend provided would deposit with
them $40, oOo 900 VI our bonds. This agreed to
And that amount Of bonds was sent to them In Lon.
don. This money was deposited with them. 30 that
they had in their possession during that period
600 OF our money. These funds were in.
tended to be applied purchasing the vessels then
building for the rebels In the English shlpyards
provided 1t were found that the English govern
ment would allow them to pass into possession OF
hands, anu hence there was no necessity for pur.
chasing them ana the funds renamed with tho
London bankers Not dollar Of It was drawn for
but renamed with them for the above period. At
the time the loan was negotiated IL agreed that
the United States should pay Barring Brothers Co.
one.haf per cent more than the rates of the
Bank OF England for the disbursement OF 1t under
the direction OF our government and that they
should pay us the same rate on the balance II any
balance should remain. As 1t turned out
1t all renamed and Barring Brothers
4 Co. were compelled by the contract
to pay the United States about seven and one-han
per cent for the use Of the money. But they held
So 0OO 900 worth Of our bonds all this time and
could make any use OF them they saw proper. Apart
from this the government was making during the
war sundry special deposits with them so that It IL
safe to say there was no time when they were not
largely our debtors. That they were accurate
prompt and courteous there Is no doubt but that
they ever paid demands Of our government when
they were without United States Is not correct
Barring Brothers Co. were originally an American
house, but In the OF time 1t became English,
as the original members OF the firm died and others
took their places The reason assigned for the
change IN the article above referred to Il that the
President desired 10 have the services Of Ameri-
can house, 1t Is strange that with this object In
view he should have selected house with an Eng
lish head and q German tail Ike that OF Clews,
Habicht l. Co. 1t may have been because the house
Of Henry Clews Il Co, is New York house and has
considerable political influence there, and this selec-
ton might have been intended to increase the
chances Of carrying the State OF New York for the
republican party. The house Of Jay Cooke Co. Is
one OF the most prominent American banking
houses, and il has branch IN London. It's reputa.
ton Ii worldwide ~ house having the full conf.
dence Of the administration. II was natural to
suppose that in the event Of change this
house would have been selected In preference
10 all others, and had not Afr. NcCul. |
loch, tine late Secretary OF the Treasury, been at
the head Of the London branch this would have |
been done, bnt In the quarrel between President |
Johnson and General Grant, when the latter was
OF War, the stand taken by MI McCulloch
was such as to forever debar him from any patron
age from that quarter and Jay Cooke b Co. could
not receive the position because OF the London ends
Of their 6rrn. This Is the long and short OF the |
Barring Brothers Co. suair as sustained by the
facts and 1gures.
The Powers Of the Civil Service Com mission. |
When the Civil Service Commission adjourned 1t
was on account OF the difference OF opinion enter.
taned by the members as TO its authority. Mr..
curtis was OF the opinion that Congress never pro.
posed that 1t should have authority 10 appoint or
examine competitors. The opinion OF the Attorney |
General, which was sent 10 the President /
Is in substance as follows;- That
Congress can by statute limit the Execu. |
1--we choice for public once BY prescribing |
that no one shall be appointed who mas not passed
an examination, but II cannot by statute limit his
power by requiring that the success.
fu competitor In an examination shan In all cases |
be appointed because this deprves the President Of
all dncretionary power; nor can lhis discretion en-
trusted TO the President be exercised by civ
board OF examiners The clause In the constitution |
requires the appointment, which includes the |
selection Of the person, TO be made By the PRESIDENT
The heads OF departments or the courts, ana the |
Attorney General regards the military ana naval |
appointment as not coming within ihis clause or |
the CONSTITUTION IL will thus 10 observed that the