New-York tribune., 1872-04-09
THE SALE OF ARMS TO FRANCE.


There are three branches of the inquiry now
going ON at Washington into the sale of arms
| TO France: 1. Whether the transactions were
| conducted in accordance with law; 2. Whether
the rules prescribed by our Government for
the preservation of neutrality between tho
| belgerents wero observed by United States
officers and 8. Whether corrupt means were
used to influence the sales
1. As to the first point it is admitted that
the only authority under which arms can be
| lawfully sold by the Government is the act OF
| 1868, providing that cold cannon, arms, ana
| "other ordnance stores now III possession OF
" the War Department which are damaged or
otherwise unsuitable for the United States
military service or for the militia of the
United States" may be disposed OF at pri-
yate sale after being offered at public sale on
thirty days notice. 1t is shown that the object of
| the law was to get rid of an accumulation of
useless material left on hand at the close of
the war, and that in order TO prevent miscon-
struction the word "now," which We have
| italicized, was inserted as an amendment while
| the bill was under consideration. because, it
| was urged without some such limitation, the
War Department might 90 on manufacturing
arms and stores for sale indefinitely. The
| Committee have shown that this law has been
violated in several particulars. In tho first
place the arms sold were neither old, nor
damaged, nor unsuitable. They were new
| Springfield rifles of the pattern of 1866, to the
excellence of which the Ordnance Office had
borne emphatic testimony. The excuse offered
for selling them is that an improved pattern
had since been made; but it is shown that no
| hoe hoo offt o1
army, and in any case that the rifles of 1866
| are not unsuitable for the militia. which is
still armed with the old muzzle-loaders. In the
second place it appears that in January, 1871,
| the Navy Department, on the recommendation
of Gen. Dyer, sold 10000 Remington rifles
| which were then making at the Springfield
armory, and with the price obtained for them
| bought lot of other aims. We know OF no
law which authorizes such sale, and
none which empowers the Secretary In
such case to make purchases with
| out authority of Congress, instead OF turn
| ing the money into the Treasury. In the third
place, it is admitted that the works at the
Frankford Arsenal were driven to their full
capacity in December, 1870, to manufacture
cartridges for sale to Thomas Richardson. 1t
will not be pretended that these cartridges
were on hand in 1868, nor can they be classed
| rs damaged OF unsuitable ordnance stores, and
| the only apology for the transaction is that
cartridges were necessary to complete the sale
of 10000 Springfield muskets. This is not q
sufficient reason for breaking the law, es-
! pccially as the sale of the guns themselves
was illegal, and even if legal would have been
unnecessary. In the fourth place, the sales
were not made in the manner prescribed by
| Congress. Except in few instances, there
was no offer at public sale on thirty days notice,
| but after one lot of arms had been duly adj
yer,ised the Ordnance Bureau assumed to go
on, for all time, selling other lots Of the same
kind of arms at whatever prices it chose This
preposterous construction of course defeated
| the whole purpose of the law.
| 2. So far as the neutrality question is con-
cerned, the inquiry is not whether we have
violated our neutral obligations, but whether
the rules prescribed by our Administration
have been obeyed by our own officers. What
| ever may have been thought OF Remington's
| relations with the French Government in the
| earlier stages of the affair, it seems that his
appointment as French agent was officially
| notified to the War Department on the 18th
| of October, 1870, and in accordance with the
| Presidents proclamation the Ordnance Bureau
| was thereupon instructed to sell no more arms
| to him. He had already contracted for the
| purchase of q large lot of muskets, but had
made no payment on them, and this bargain
was allowed to stand, the first instalment OF
| the price being accepted two or three days
| after the Secretary's prohibition. This seems
| to us unwarrantable; but we can understand
| that the Secretary or his subOrdinates may
| have honestly judged differently. Afterwards,
| Remington made his purchases through sub
agents. No inquiry was made into the char
| acter or legal status Of these middle-men.
| Some Of them were arms dealers. Others were
connected with the Remingtons in various
ways; and the principal purchaser, Thomas
Richardson, was the Remingtons' lawyer.
| Though it may be difficult to prove positive
knowledge ON the part of the Ordnance
| Bureau that Richardson, Squire, and Others
were virtually French agents. it is clear that
the constructive ignorance OF this fact, if such
| ignorance existed. must have been willful.
| The guns were delivered by the ordnance Of
fcers on board the French steamers, an agent
| of Col. Crispin, commandant of the New York
Arsenal, checking them as they came up the
| side. The boxes were marked II. +. before
| they left the hands of the Government, and
| though some doubt was sought to be thrown
upon the meaning of these letters, it was at
last distinctly proved that they stood for Re-
| pubique Trdncaise The person who signed
| the receipts for the guns at the pier signed
indifferently for Remington, Richardson, Or
| Austin, Baldwin e. &C., Moreover, it is in
| evidence that in Dec, 1870, just at the time
| wben the manufacture of cartrid0os wos nm