The New York herald., 1872-04-07

| WASHINGTON. Aprfl Q, 1872.
The Naval Investigation Committee met this even
ing at half.past seven O'Clock. Mr.. Dana and his
counsel were not present.
TESTIMONY OF REAR ADMIRAL BoGGs.
Rear Admiral Boggs was sworn and was exaT-
| ined by Secretary Robeson. He testified that he
| has been In the navy forty-hve years; was under
| Admiral Gregory during the war experimenting
| the construction OF iron-clads in New York; was
| President or the Board which examined the
| Secor claims, and considered them fair ana
| according to the contract; he examined ana
found they had not been paid; similar claims were
| paid TO Miles Greenwood, under the Wsles admin
| istration OF the Navy Department. after examina-
| tion by the Board OF which Admiral Gregory was
President; but he admiral Gregory died before the
Secor claims were finally acted on; the order was
1 TO treat all claims ali Ike.
Mr. ARCHER asked whether the board OF which
witness was president included any or the allow
| ances OF the Merchant Board9 to which question
witness replied, he thought not--ior reasons given.
q. When you were on The board IN 1869 did you
| take into consideration the law OF 1868 which
allowed Secor, Perrine Co. SIS, 900 in full settle.
| mentp A. The Conclusion to which the board came
was that the law did not appear to apply TO this
case; but as they were not lawyers that was for
the department to settle.
| Admiral BOggs was urther examined by Mr..
: Archer as to the character OF the work done. The
board allowed Miles Greenwood payment extra to
| the contract
BY Secretary RoBEsoN-The same allowance was
made as to the TlppecanOe, which was boat siml-
| lar to those OF the Secors.
CHIEF ENGINEER LoRINGs STATEMENT.
Engineer Lons VINO was one Of the Boggs
testified that the same work was done by the Secors
as on the llppecanoe; the bill IN the case Of the
Ttppecanoe was sent TO the board to compare by;
the extras were not in the bill previously paid to
the Secors; all the work was extra to the contract
the bills presented by the Secors were marked 're-
jocted" by the former Board or not. The Board
| examined particular bill to whether anv the
Items could be found on the bills which had been
paid. The member OF the secor Company who APP
peared before the Board was not sworn to his
account. The Board took no declarauons other
than those or the ollcers who composed It,
by Secretary RoBEsON--And the fact that similar
payments were made on other monitors.
CHIEF ENGINEER KING TEsTIFIEs.
Chief Engineer King. Chief OF the Bureau or
Steam Engineering, was sworn, and was examined
by secretary Robeson He testified, among other
things that the Board was authorized by Congress,
under the direction OF Secretary Welles; the Board
considered how much would BIZ due 10 contractors
Secors were ruled out as not coming within the
law; witness went to Europe on his own motion;
the Secretary of the Navy saying he did not wish
him to be absent nom the bureau
Mr.. ARCHER remarked 1t appeared from the re-
port OF the Marchand Board that s52I 1876 had been
paid TO the Secors for work over and above their
Witness said that he presumed that statement to
be correct.
for damages ana $93 600 besides.
SECOND CoMPrRoLLER BRoDHEAD.
John nj. Brodhead, Second Comptroller OF the
Treasury, testified he has control OF the accounts
arising In the War and Navy Departments and the
Pension ana Indian Bureaus; he was the officer
when the vouchers came to him for the payment OF
900 TO the Secors, ms impression was that the
| allowance was a mistake. lie took them up to the
secretary OF the Navy with whom he had an inter-
view, and called his attention on TO the law OF 1865;
b0tn came 10 the conclusion that the acts oil 1857
and 1858 were completely IN par 'nate,fd, and
must be construed with regard to each other and
that the award made by the board Designate acted
only the claims that could not be allowed by the
department outside OF the contract being IN the
The witness became satisfied with the view taken
by the Secretary. and had no doubt OF It's correct
since. The law o1 1868 said the $l15 900 should
be In full discharge OF all claims against United
states on account OF these vessels upon which the
Board made the allowance their report under
the act of March 2 1867. There was need OF In
terventIon OF Congress, as there were large bal.
ance due the secors Witness was entirely satis-
ned, and passed the vouchers. II was not unusual
TO reopen accounts 1t was sometimes done ir 1t
was supposed the claims were just.
Mr.. Broadhead was also lnterroRated on other
points.
Alexander W. Russell. Pay Inspector and Naval
tary Of the Navy never said word to him ABOUT
business until here to-nignt nor did he hold any
Official way. The witness gave an account OF oh.
tanning supplies, never departing from the rule OF
giving contract contract os waen BIDS ose,nn are made to
the intervention OF middle men; he always
applied for authority to advertise for prOpo-
sails when the amount OF merchandise required was
over a thousand dollars, ana no authority was given
except In urgent cases; he applied tor authority
advertise Tor 900 tons OF coal for the Tennessee
lust before she went to Samana BAY, but he pur-
chased the coal without advertising having been
ordered to do SO without delay; he never had any
direction from the Secretary OF the Navy to favor
anybody, but he
RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY, AS
| FoLLowS:-
| NAVY DEPARTMENT WAsHINGToN, May Is, 1871.
| DEAR SIK-Mr William lngham OF the firm OF Shoemaker
of personal friend of my and q a q
gentleman of character and responsibility snail be giad
bis hrm can have iar opportunity TO supply coal WIN the
subject of TO the provisions of the law that
ec and to the best interests Of the country Very truly
yours, GEORGE NJ. ROBSON, Secretary of the Navy.
ALEXANDER w. RUSSELL, Purchasing Paymaster Phla
delphia, Pa.
There no middle-men who make purchases
for the Navy Department In Philadelphia there
never was an order given TO witness TO purchase
coal from either OF the Cottes or that they should
buy coal for him. he had purchased flour from
A. G. Cottell h Co., nour and commission mer-
chants, at various times TO send on board OF ships
going to Tor baking bread In the navy yard
the whole amount OF purchases being So. l3s 3S to
date witness never employed anybody TO buy
to him about Shoemaker and Ingham, the witness
SAID they never sold him any coal; they made bld
but their bid was not low enough.
Mr. ARCHER asked whether he had ever been ap
preached directly indirectly Dy the COttels or by
their friends to give them contracts, to which ques
ton witness replied ne had never Deen tnus APP
preached.
Tne Committee adjourned at balf.past ten O'Clock
until Monday evening.