Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-04-14
WASHINGTON.
Progress of the Robson Investigation
Gideon WeIles on the witness Stand
Dana's Charges Fully Substantiated
a Conricted Cabinet Oaicer

A Convicted Cabinet Officer.
| WASHINGTON, April 13.-At the Naval
Investigation tonight, Secretary ,Weiles
! testified as to contracts of Secors while he
was Secretary. He did not reeollect the
date, but they were extended from time ia
time. Admiral Gregory's Board passed
upon claims for alterations. The contract
price for building thr6e iron-clads was
J S1,300,000, The Secors were allowed be-
| tween 100000 and 100000 additional.
! The Ringold Board completed the scrutiny
! of the Secor claims after the death of Greg
! ory. Secors had claims for extra work which
the Navy Department could not allow. An
| appeal was made to Congress by Secors and
Others, which resulted in the appointment
Of the Selfridge board who made a report on
claims amounting TO $2,O0G,e00. The Sec
rotary believed no action was taken on this
report, but law was passed authorizing
the Secretary of the Navy to appoint a
Board toexamine the claims and report in
detail. The Secretary appointed board
of which Marchand was President. The
Board took up the claims and made areport
allowing 100000. After the passage of the
act for the settlement of the Secor and other
claims, application was made to witness to
reopen them, but this he considered he had
no right to do as the claims had passed from
control Of the department. Congress hav-
ing disposed ofthem, he regarded the Secor
claims as finally paid, so far as the Navy
Department was concerned.
Witness recollected a contract with Paul
L. Forbes, who made an utter failure in
building engines for the Idaho and Algon-
quin. The Naval Department refused to
paw the bill, whereon the contractor went
to Congress receiving more than he ought
to have received, namely 100000.
During the proceedings, Mr.. Blair, chair
man Of the committee, who had just re-
turned from Michigan, resumed his seat.
Questioned by Secretary Robson, ex-
Secretary Welles said the Forbes claim, he
knew was not paid by the Department IN
der bis administration. He didn't examine
bills of Secors in detail. The RingOld
board had the iron.clads under cOnsidera-
ton. He thought he paid all claims allow
ed by the board. unless exceptions were ia
ken to some portions. BE couldn't say that
either the Mahopac, or Manhattan, or Te-
cumseh, was before the board and whether
the board reported on these vessels. He did
not suppose that SecOrs had any claims TO
consider.
Secretary RObeson-Is there any record
showing that this account was closed?
Answer can not tell, but know that
| passed on the claims; as | thought adjust
ed and concluded them. do not know on
what ground Secor's claims were reOpened
and paid. do not know what the items
were, but they were closed as had sup
posed.
Secretary Robeson-You have said that
several times.
Witness will say it again if the ques-
ton is asked.
In reply to a question by Robson, wit
ness said he wrote no letter to Charles A.
Dana that appeared in the Sm. Dana
wrote TO him, enclosing a slip from his pa
per, and asking him whether he knew any
thing relating to the subjects therein con-
tanned. Witness replied to Dana that he
had heard some of them, but not ali. He
denied the right of any one to call on him
for his private correspondence, but
he would say that Dana af-
terward wrote to him to know
whether there was a written contract for
the Ames guns, to which he replied he
could not recollect, but bis impression was
were in that newspaper article various
charges against the Navy Department.
There was something about bricks being
sent to California, but he could not recol-
Iect others. THE article was shown to wit
ness-it was dated Feb. 26.l He said it
was similar to the one he had received from
Mr.. Dana.
Secretary RObeson-Did you write back
to Dana saying the charges were substan-
italy trUe2
Answer wrote to him that had heard
some of these things but not Of others. l
don't think made use of the expression
that they were substantially trGe.
Question-Did you make the suggestion
that the payment Of the SeCor claim was a
New Years present, because it was made
on that day?
Answer heard it was insisted that the
Tequisition should be issued on the 3lst of
Dec, but this could not be done, the hour
being late and the force having left the bu-
reau. 1t was, however, issued next day,
Jan. l.
Question-Did you suggest in that letter
to Dana that the Secretary Of the Navy or
anybody else received a New Years present
out of the money.
Answer did not say that the Secretary
received any part of the $4,000.
Question-Did you suggest that anybody
did.
Answer stated part of what heard,
but l mentioned nObody's name.
Witness was Intercepted at length by
the several members Of the committee re-
garding the payment Of the claims.
Mr.. Peters asked witness whether he
would not consider it proper to pay Secors
claim Of $4,000, they having performed
work for the Navy Department but had not
received a cent therefor.
Witness replied that as Congress had
passed on the SecOr claims and made an
appropriation for their settlement in full,
nothing could have induced him to reopen
the case.
Adjourned until Monday evening.