The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1872-04-03
WASHINGTON.
THE ARMS INVESTIGATION.
NAVAL INQUIRY.
EARL GRANvILLE'S REPLY.

WASHINGTON, April 2--In the case of Good
ing against Wilson from Evansville. District of
Indiana, the Republican members of the House
Committee on Elections will report in favor of
Wilson and the narnaGrats in faHnr Of Gaoding.
reports have been strictly partizan.
In the case of DeLarge against Bowen from
South Carolina, Judge Paschall moved to dis
miss the contest on the ground that after the
alleged election to Congress, Bowen acted as a
member of the South Carolina Legislature
THE SALE OF ARMS INVESTIGATION.
The Senate Arms Committee examined Sec
rotary Robson to-day His testimony was
similar to that heretofore given by him before
the House Committee on Expenditures in the
War Department He now, as at that time, de-
tailed the circumstances under which 10000
Remington rifles were manufactured at the
Springfield armory and were sold to Poultney
& Trimble, of Baltimore. This sale enabled
the Navy Department to procure l., 600 of those
arms with the money received. The proposition
to buy was made the goth of January, 1871, and
the contract settled the I'd of March. None of
the arms were delivered until March Goth of the
same year. Witness did not know where the
arms were delivered. There was, so far as he
knew, no law requiring advertisements to be
published as preliminary to the sale of war
material on hand; it was always sold to the best
advantage of the Government. $50.
In response to Mr.. Schurz. witness said that
Remington received royalty Of one dollar a
gun. After the Department had made arrange
ments with him for the manufacture of 1O,0 600
guns, the Department asked him whether he
would not reduce the royalty if 1900 rifles
were ordered but Remington refused, saving it
was small amount. Witness did not know
who suggested to outside parties the sale of
these arms; was not aware how the fact be-
came known. In answer to the question
whether Gen. Dyer recommended the sale
of these arms, witness replied that he thought
Dyer did say it would be an advantage to have
ws<9 49,. ~.
as thereby skilled workmcn would be retained !:
otherwise some might have to be discharged
He thought the conversation took place after
the arrangement with Trimble and Poultney
In answer to MIR. Schurz, he said he could not
tell where the arms were finished, but the first
delivered was not until the 21st of March. He
did not think the arms would be used by either
of the European belligerents as the Franco
German war was virtually over.
Jabez IL. Gill was sworn:-Senater Hamlin
stated TO him that Mr.. Edwards said yesterday
that in December, 1871, he saw at the Frank
| fort arsenal Gen. Dyer, Samuel Remington
Col. Squires and Col. Treadwell, and that Gill
told him that these parties had private CONVEX
sation whice he understood was on the subject
OF the purchase of ammunition Witness said
he heard no such conversation and did not see
Remington. but the next day he heard he was
there: He did not see Squires. Never heard
that Remington was there to buy cartridges.
COZ IreadWell, commandment of the Frank
| time in December, 1870, Gen. Dyer and Rem
| ingten were there. Did not know that, Rem
| ington's purpose was to purchase. After the
force at the arsenal was increased the service or
\ cap handle cartridges used for the Springfield
rifles were made. Remington had made in
| quiries about the manufacture of CARTRIDGES.
he had purchased machinery for the making
| of cartridges. Witness knew of no officers who
| had profited BY the, sale of arms or ordnance
The committee adjourned till tomorrow
| RECEPTION OF EARL GRANv1LLE's NOTE
The lettero of Earl Granville was read at the
Cabinet meeting to-day, occupying nearly two
hours of the session The particulars of the
letter cannot be ascertained, for the reason that
| the Cabinet members decline to converse on the
subject 1t is known, however, from reliable
sources that the letter is in the character of an
elaborate argument against the claim of the
| United States for indirect damages. 1t is firm
| yet friendly in tone, and expresses the hope
| that both nations will be able to come to an UNI
| Outstanding which will eventually carry out the
treaty OF Washington according to what the
British Government believes its true intent and
| meaning. The letter is in accord with the re-
cent utteranees of the British press. The Sec
retary OF State will not reply to Earl Granville
for some days, as time is required for the con-
sideration of the points and arguments of this
unusually long diplomatic letter. From init
nations in high quarters the Government will
adhere to its position, submitting its entire case,
claims for indirect or consequential damages in
cluded, with willingness to abide by the decis-
Ion OF those designated by the treaty to effect
an adjustment of the differences between the
two countries.