Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1872-05-11

WASHINGTON, May 10-Thc senate arms
committee to-day agreed upon their report
which will be made tomorrow The committee,
in reviewing the protests OF Senator Sumner,
say that having given them due consideration
the committee cannot doubt that subpoena
was properly issued to him, and that he was
bound to obey it and testify before the commit
tee; and that his refusal to answer the questions
which were put to him cannot be justified. The
committee are duly jealous OF the honor of our
country and reputation of the officers of our
government, and have great satisfaction in being
able, after most thorough and impartial inyes-
tigation, to say that there is nothing in these
actions which reflects dishonor upon either
The sales were made according to the settled
construction of the statute in the war depart
ment, with results exceedingly favorable TO the
government. Therefore, they find nothing in
the conduct OF the secretary of war or
his subortinatcs deserving Censnre in this
respect. There is no doubt that they
all proceeded in the full belief that they
were acting in strict conformity with the
law. The right to sell the stores cannot be
questioned. The manner of sale, at the worst
was mere error or irregularty in details of an
execution of an undoubted power and in the
result there was no sacrifice of any interest of
the government. The sales of arms and militia
ry stores during the fiscal year ending June So
1871, were not made under such circumstances
as 10 violate the obligations OF our government
toward neutral power; and this TO recapilu-
ate) for three reasons: first, the Remingtons
were not in fact agents OF France during the
time when the sales were made to them; second
1t they were such agents, such fact was neither
known nor suspected by our government at the
time the sales were made; and third, if they
had been such agents, and if that fact had leen
known to our government, or il, instead of send
ing agents, Louis Napoleon or Frederick Will
Ian had personally appeared at the war de-
partment to purchase arms, il would have been
laN sEtaI HAsu Ill -
suance of the national policy adopted by the
United States prior to the commencement of
hostiities. There is not the slightest
foundation for even a suspicion that any officer
OF tAe war department or of the government
derived any advantage from these sales
The name of Gen. Rufus ingalls, having been
mentioned IN this connection, and he having
been subjected to some criticism, the committee
feel bound bya mere act of justice to say that
he is fully exonerated. His only connection
with this transaction was the execution of an
unofficial, friendly Office in delivering message
10 and making an inquiry OF the French minis
ter at Washington, for which he neither received
nor expected TO receive the slightest consider
alton or advantage; and the committee believe
the conduct Of the secretary OF war and his sub
ordinates in these transactions entirely blame
less, and that it resulted in great advantage to
the government and inasmuch as the Reming-
tons have also been mentioned in this conuec-
ton, justice requires at the hands of the com
mittee the remark that this investigation has
not resulted in impcachine the high character
which they have so long sustained for enter
prise and business integrity. The committee.
in conclusion, say an examination Of the teSt-
mony cannot fail TO produce the impression that
the Marquis de Chambrun is the source of
all aspersiOns which have been thrown upon our
government, and the suspicious which have been
cast upon its officials. His connection with the
legation of France, from which he sometimes
WI ut fbpr 1,
shelters himself leaves in doubt what was his
real purpose in all this matter. At times he
seems to have been intriguing in the interest of
the French government to establish claims or
causes of complaint against American citizens
At other times he seems to have been acting as
agent or friend of his relative, tie former consul
general of France at New York, NJ. Place. Ii is
impossible to determine from testimony precisely
where his official character ended and his per.
sona efforts commenced, or precisely what was
the purpose for which he desired this investiga-
ton But it is certain that he labored constantly
and finally with success to accomplish it. HAY
ing failed to procure an investigation by our
government, by which he hoped to OBJ
tain proof to effect the trial of his
friend and relative, NJ. Place. in France,
by applying to Senator Patterson and
Secretary Beknap, both friends of the admins
tTation of our government, the marquis next
applied to Senators SChurz and Sumner He
furnished to Senator Sumner the copy of the
letter from Remington to LeceSne, although in
subsequent conversation with Secretary Bout.
well he denied that he had done so, and charged
upon Senator Patterson that he (Chambrun)
had given the letter TO him TO be shown to the
president, and that Senator Patterson had Just
given it or a copy of it TO Senator Sumner. This
letter was one Of the principal inducements to
the introduction by Senator Sumner of the
resolution Cor the investigation. Another in
ducement was the supposed discrepancy be-
tween the accounts of the war and treasury
departments in regard to these sales, which
turns out not to have existed and yet another
was pretended resolution Of the French assem-
oily, or some committee thereof, which il ap-
pears never was passed. Had Senators Sum ner
and Schurz applied 10 the treasury and war
departments tor information on this subject,
with the slight inconvenience of a
five minutes walk, but which they omitted
to do, they would have learned all the material
facts which 1t has cost the government thou
sands of dollars to ascertain by this investiga-
ton. They would have learned that there was
no discrepancy between the accounts of the two
departments, and that there was no fraud or
violation of the law of nations in these sales
But in that case Chambrun would have failed
IN his Efforts to use the senate as an instrument
tally for obtaining testimony to vndicate his
friend, NJ. Place, and the opportunity would
have been lost to cast suspicion upon and raise
scandal against the executive administration
OF our government.
TO rest the case This investigation was
moved, first upon statement that certain
resolution had been adopted in France; second
upon misrepresentation as to the state OF ac-
counts between the two executive departments
OF our own government; and third, on totally
unfounded suspicion as to the conduct of The
war department in making the sales. II
is now ascertained that such supposed
resolution never was passed that the
other two grounds had no existence in
fact, as might easily have been discovered by
the senator who moved and supported this reso-
luton of inquiry. In yet other words. this
resolution was based upon one falsehood one
misapprehensiOn, and one unfounded suspi
cion, and would not have been mOvediat all had
the other senators initiated the wisdom and pru-
dence which marked the course of Senator pat
terSon, The committee also incurred whether
the breech loading muskets or other muskets
capable of being transformed into breech load
ers, were not sold by the war department in
such large numbers as seriously to impair the
defensive cap icity of the country in time of war:
and after quoting testimony upon the subject.
say there can be no doubt that the government
could arm million of men as fast as they couid
be raised and organized to receive arms. The
committee therefore report that the sales under
consideration have not seriously impaired the
defensive capacity Of the country in time Of
war.
Senator Stevenson will present his dissenting
views,