Year: 1872

It has not even been chargeu tnat oecretarJ
Belknap. who is tho head OF that Department,
knew where these warlike supplies were going
Il is suggested according to our report, that
some subordinate, however, may have been
aware of what was going on; this is exactly
what has been charged. What sort OF an ad-
ministration of public affairs is that which
coolly turns over to shoulder strapped sub
altern consideration and decision OF nice
point of international lawf 1t Is not worth
while now to argue the legal question which was
thus remanded to an irresponsible agent nfiu-
entail authorities may differ on it; but here was
a clerk or agent given the whole issue to dis
pose of in his own light and airy manner
Then, If the question Of international law was
rightly left to the decision OF the subaltern,
what can be said to justify the con-
clusion that the War Department legally
conducted the sales = 1t is mere
assertion. That tho sales were made
under the shadow of the law OF 1865
nobody denies; this statute has all along been
the sole excuse Of apologsts for the War De-
partment But it has been over and over
again shown, on the other hand, that this law
was not sufficient to cover the transaction.
Tho statute provides for the sale OF damaged
or unserviceable arms. Who knows that these
arms were damaged or unserviceablef Another
law, carefully huddled out of sight as long as
possible provides for an inspection OF
the arms and their condemnation before
sale. No such inspection, no such condemna-
ton, were ever had. To this day there exists
nowhere a scintla of evidence that the arms
and stores sold to the French were not new,
seryceable, and every way desirable for the
use of our own army there is every reason
to believe that the arms and stores were
desirable for use With this free construction
of law, there is no earthly reason why
the new guns in Fort Hamilton or the fresh
shells stored at Alcatraz should not be quietly
sold tomorrow and Congress and the people
know nothing of the transact on until the de-
tails were brought out by inves stigation as a
"good bargain for the United States Govern
"ment."


Even this fit of thrifty truck-and-dicker
which is taken as justification for an illegal
bargain will not bear inspection. That good
deal of money was brought in from the sale OF
large amount of portable propertyis apparent;
how much actual profit, as careful merchants
reckon profit, cost and loss, the world Will
never know. But this whole question should
not be SO considered. We have protested
against taking from Congress the right
of legislating I upon the disposal OF
the public property; against centralizing in
an Executive Department all the powers
of the Government; against intrusting to an
irresponsible person the determination OF
grave questions like those involved in the
sales of war material to belligerents. These
things have all been done in the progress OF
the scandalous transactions which we have just
considered. 1t is not right for Republic to
consent to such Capitalization of power; it
is not just TO allow any servant OF tho Gov
ernment such broad license, such unlimited
discretion Whatever may be said OF the
economy OF the honesty of these transactions,
they were clearly illegal and dangerous as
nrecedcntS