Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-12-18
sUGG FORTS CLAIM.
All the Papers I'm she Case Laid BE
fore COnZreSs

fore Congress.
The Secretary of War has transmitted to-
the House Of Representatives, in compli-
ance with resolution Of that body of the
9Th inst, the papers relative to the claim
of Sugg Fort, Of Robertson county, Tenn.
The claim was for $23, 1880, for -four
alleged to have been taken for army use
from December, 1852, to May, 1868. On
the 10Th of March, 1873, Gen. Eaton, Com
missary General of Subsistence, inreply to
note from Charles O'Neil requesting i'm
mediate attention TO the claim, informs
that gentleman that his request cannot be
complied with, and refers him to the act of
March 8, 1871, establishing the Southern
CLAIMS Commission, by which this claim
was barred from consideration by the De-
partment. May 5, 1874, the Commission
ers Of Claims furnished the following:
"Memorandum@Sugg Fort-The above
is the name of person believed to be from
Arkansas, who has claim pending before
tbs Government which Is understood to be
for commissary stores, and which Col.
Irwin, Chief Engineer of the Texas Pacific
Railroad, informs Representative John Co
burn, of Indiana, is wholly fraudulent.
The claim is before the Southern Claims
Commission, and this memorandum is
| therefore circulated among officers of the
Commissary General, Quartermaster Gen.
eral and Third Auditors Departments"
On the 18th of May, 1874, Gen. Shiras,
Commissary General of Subsistence, re-
plies to a request of the Secretary of War
that by letter Of March 10, 1878, Charles
II. ONeil, attorney, submitted a claim in
favor OF Sugg Fort for 2,79l barrels of -four,
at eight dollars per barrel, $23, 723.50, al
legged to have been taken in Robertson
county, Tennessee, from December, 1862,
to May, 1868, for army use. No receipts
or vouchers, and no officer was designated
as the one taking the flour. This claim
was returned to O'Neil, December II, 1873,
this officer declining 10 act on Tennessee
claims preeented after March 3, 1S71-the
date of the act creating the Commission Of
Claims.
June p, Sugg Fort addressed letter 10
Gen. Belknap, stating that '.the Commits
sary General has charge Of my accounts
and papers for cOmmissary supplies taken
| and used by the United States troops in the
late war. Will you please do me the kind
ness to request him to consider and inves-
tigate my claim as soon as practicable, and
| oblige;" which was Endorsed as follows:
'The Commissary General can examine
this claim and report upon it if action
thereon is proper and not to the prejudice
of other claimants whose papers have been
previously fled" Signed W. ". Belknap,
Secretary, etc, June "a, 1874.
June 80, Sen. Shiras transm its the claim
TO the Third Auditor as having been ex-
amined under the third section Of the act
| of July IL, 1854, with the Recommendation
i The afaTv,ar,f 10 rsasT ir,f nTl and or,
same date advised Hon. r. z. Butler that
the claim had been allowed.
July 6. 1S74-Hon. William Lawrence
sent to the Third Auditor the following
extracts from letter dated Washington,
July ,, which he says is from a gentleman
who has some opportunity to know some
thing OF the claim, and asks that the at
tention Of the Commissary General be
called to it, adding that the claim was re-
iected by the Committee on War Claims:
Extracts
WASHINGTON, July 2, 1ST4-
'sThe claim of .Sugg Fort, which you re-
member we reported adversely, was yes
terday paid in full, amounting to some
S2S, 200, on recommendation Of the Com
miSsary General. You remember how
Fort aud his friends resisted its reference
to the Commissioner of Claims, and well
he might. In my judgment there was
never presented to Congress a more
OutrageOusly fraudulent claim than this,
and the circumstances connected with its
being put through the departments fully
justify an examination by Congress or a
committee thereof. In spite of the fact
that an officer of the QUartermaster Gen
erals Department, Col. Irwin, who was on
duty at Nashville and knew all
about the facts at the time, writes under
date Of,June S, 1872, a confidential lette-'
to Gen. Eaton, COmmissary of Subsistence,
pronOuncing the claim fraud, and in spite
Of the fact that other officers on duty there
state hat the proof is of the most shadOwy
character, the claim is rushed through the
departments within ten days after the ad-
jOurnment of Congress, and after the claim
had been rejected by Congress, and the facts
appear in the papers. Certainly the boast
that il cost 81 600 10 fix up certain
in the departments, andthe character of the
man and Of the witness fully justify an in
vestigatiOn, and l hope you will see this
winter that it is had. / have been carefully
through the papers at the Third Auditors
Office, this morning, aud the case is Ger
certainly and beyond doubt fraud. Fort
says that remained here to put his case
through, and It has been followed and
watched at every step"
Nov. II, 1874, Mr.. II. r. Smith, clerk to
the Committee on War Claims, and spe-
cial agent, addressed a note to Gen. Shiras,
in which this passage occurs: ~ see just
how you have been imposed upon by Fort
and his friend, Mr.. r. r. Butler, (whO is
placed in quite as bad a light as is Mr..
Fort), and want, therefore, to give you
this opportunity TO make statement, show
ing the history Of the case, so far as it re-
lates to your Office, its original presenta-
tiOn, return, second presentation, the rea-
son that induced you to take cognizance Of
the case, after having once decided that
you had no jurisdiction, as to Buffers state
ments, and, in fine, anything bearing on
the case"
To this Gen. Shiras replied at consider
able length, the following day, stating that
a denomination of the acts of Congress
convinced him that there was concurrent
Jurisdiction, and he consented to take up
the case. The testimony presented was
the same as that before the Committee on
War Claims, certified by the Clerk of the
House. he says he received several calls
from Messrs. Fort and Butler, and although
he can not recall with certainty any Ian
guage to that effect, he was under the i'm
preston that the case had not been reached
by the committee. He says: "Even with
out any such language being used, it would
never have occurred to me that a claim
backed by a member of Congress could be
presented to this office when. the member
knew that an adverse report had been made
upon it by a committee of the House"
His reasons for allowing the claim are
| given as follows: "The evidence of Mr..
Fort was clear, although his motive for not
receiving vouchers were not those which
would weigh with business men. Gen.
Mitchell confirmed this testimony, and the
case took the form of confidential matter
between the commanding officer at Nash
vile and Mr.. Fort. Two labOrers at the
mill correlated the testimony in a general
way, and the miller swore positively TO the
number of barrels of -four taken as shown
by his books. The character of Mr.. Fort
was vouched for by very respect able names,
| and the case seemed clear under the law,
as it was not to be supposed but that the
-four was distributed by the Commanding
General for the use of the troops" As to
the letter of Col. Irwin, he gave it no
weight, as he transaction being conf
| Dental one between the Commanding
General and Mr.. Fort, the officer in charge
of transportation would not have been in
formed Of it.