United States. Congress.

Congressional record : proceedings and debates of the ... Congress online

. (page 137 of 172)
Online LibraryUnited States. CongressCongressional record : proceedings and debates of the ... Congress → online text (page 137 of 172)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

this enormous amount of money under any circumstances ; the lai^est portion of
which, at least, has been taken from the officers and enlisted men of this post,
nearly all the money of the latter mentioned going to the trader. The responsible
party of this great iivjustice should bo hM responsible and be obliged to rcfuud
uio money. ^

If J. S. Evans baa not paid this exorbitant price for permission to trade, as stated
by him. his goods shoulo be seized and sold tor the benefit of the post fund.

In order to insure a h(«althy comjietition, to reduce t^ho piioe of goods, nud to re-
lieve the officers and soldiers of tuis garnson from this imposition. I recommend
that at least three (3) traders be appointed, and that those appointmenta l>o made
upon tbe recommendation of the officers of the po>tt ; that each trader be known to
be interested only in his own house, and that they be obliged to keep such ar-
ticles as are reoiured for the use of officers and enlisted men of the Army, and to
sell them at moaorate prices.

The trader complies with circular of A. G. O. issued June 7, 1871, as far as I am

The buildings, (store, Ac.,) however, are not convenient to the present garrison,
having been built at the time when the command was in camp,
very respectfully, your obedient servant,

OolonH Tenth Valvary, Commanding.

Beoeired in the office of the Adjutant-General March 0, 1879.
War Departmkkt, A. G. O., March 11, 1878.

Respectfully forwarded to the Secretary of War, with application of C. P. Marsh

for traderahip at Fort SilL



Digitized by




What action did the defendant take on the receipt of this which the
proof shows was on the 9th March, 1872 f None whatever. While he
buonld have at once issued an order removing Evans, as the President
did when the facts were brought to his knowledge, he forbore action
mitil General McDowell waited on him and told him it was a ** thing
that would be damaging to the service if it was not at once corrected,^
General McDowell also told him it concerned him personally. The
Secretary said in substance that these traders were not sutlers and
the military had no power to control them. He had obtained the un-
qualified opinion of the Judge- Advocate-General, dated March 16, 1872,
tnat he had not and could not exercise control over post-traders as
to the prices at which they should sell goods to soldiers and others.

Tet, with the concurrence of General McDowell, who was acting
upon the mistaken view that Marsh was the post-trader and Evans
his agent, he issued the order of the 25th March, which the A^futant-
General says is all the notice he ever took of General Grierdon's letter ;
and to this order I desire to call the particular attention of Senators.
It is as follows :


War Dbpabtmbnt,
Wcufdngton City, March 25, 187S.

L The ooimoil of administration at a poet wbero thero is a post-trader will from
tbne to time examine the post-trader's goods and invoices or bills of sale ; and will,
subject to the approval of thepost-oommander, OMtablish the rates and prices (which
should be fair and reasonable) at which the goods shall be sold. A copy of the list
thus established will be kept posted in the trader's store. Should the post-trader
feel himself aggrieved by the action of the council of administration, he may appeal
therefrom through the post-commander to the War Depargnont.

II. In determining the rate of profit to be allowed, the council will consider not
only the prime cost, freight, and other charges, but also the fact that, while the
tnuler pays no tax or contridution of any kind to the i>ost fund for his exclusive
privileges, he has no lien on the soldier's pay, and is without t^e security in this
respect ouce eqloyed by the suUers of the Army.

III. Post-traders will actually carry on the business themselves, and will habitu-
ally reside at the station to which they are appointed. They will not farm out,
sublet, transfer, or soil or assign the business to others.

IV. In case there shall be at this time any post-trader who is a non-resident of
ihe post to which he has been appointed, he will be allowed ninety days from the
receipt hereof at his station to comply with this circular or vacate his appointment.

V. Post-commanders are hereby directed to report to the War Department any
failure ou the part of traders to fulfill the requiremenu of this circular.

VI. The provisions of the circular from the Adjutant-General's Office of June 7,
1871, will continue in force ex ce pt as herein modified.

By order of the Secretary of War:



It will be seen, as stated by my learned associate [Mr. McMahon] dur-
ing the trial, that this order entirely fails to correct the real evil, that
is, the payment by Evans to Marsh of $12,000 a year as a consideration
for receiving the appointment and retainiug the post. It is true it
professes to vest in the council of administration the power to-ex-
amine the post-trader's prices, which the Judge- Advocate had just in-
formed him he had no power to do, and to determine the prices at
which the trader should sell, which should be fair and reasonable, oon-
sidering not only the cost ami freight, but the fact that the trader had
no lien on the soldiers' pay as sutlers had, and then adds :

Should the past-trader fed himself aggrieved by the action </ the co%mcH i\f adminia-
tration he inay appeal ther^rom to the War Department I

Huw Marsh and Evans must have been gratified when they saw
this order. The only effect it had on their arrangement w.ns to re-
duce the amount to be paid from $12,000 to $(5,000 per year, of which
reduction, as well as the Agreement with Evans, Marsh testifies he
informed the defendant within a month after the Tribune article—
the first time he saw him after, which was in New York — and the
8ecretarv then informed him Hazen inspired that article, but made
no iuquiry as to the terms of the contract with Evans or as to why
the amount had been reduced from twelve to six thousand dollars.

A part of the evidence of General McDowell is very pertinent in
this connection, and I ask leave to call attention to it. It is as fol-

Question. (By Mr. Carpentbb.) I ask you. General, whether on reflection and
after looking at that article you tbiuk you were or were not mistaken in saying
that you supposed that Marsh was the post-trader at the time you ha^l your inter-
view with the Secretary of War ?

Antiwer. I can hardly ssiy what particular relations Marsh or Evans had with
tills matter. The Secretary told me he had appointed Marsh, and I supposed he
had received the otlice. Whether he had tranarerred it, or assigned it, or sublet it,
or farmed it out, or what relations he had with it was not, in my mincl, a very spe-
cial question. What I wanted to do was to correct an abuse ; but whether the form
was that Marsh waH the ti'ader or the other man was the trader was not so much in
my mind as to discuss the question that was then up

Q. Was it of any importance whether Marsh was the trader and Evans his agent,
or t he reverse I

Mr. Manager McMahon. O, tou do not Insist on that question.

Mr. CAttrKXTER. If not I should not have asked it. (To the witness:) What I
mean is. would it have made any ditTerence with the order which you were to draw
if you had known the fact te be exactly the reverse? Would not this order as you
drew it have covered the abuse in the one case Just as well as the other f That is
the question.

Mr. Manager McMauom. We withdraw the objection.

The Witness, (to Mr. Carpc*nter.) I do not understand you.

Q. (By Mr. Caupentbu.) The question is this: Suppose you had known that
EvaiiH was thetmderand lived at ITort Sill and that Marsh wan not the trader,
would vou have drawn this order in any diCfereut terms than you did emplovf

Mr. Manager Hoail Do y<m mean to suppose in your question that Marsh re-
ceived any sum of money from Evans!

Mr. CAia'B.N'TBR. If that occurs to me I will put it in my question. It had not
occurred yet as part of my question.

The Witness If the case was otherwise, it would have been different, of course.

Q. (By Mr. Cabpbntbb.) How different would it have been f Sappoae yon had

thought at the time that Mr. Marsh was the trader and lived in New York, what
order would you have drawn diifijrent fmm this?

A. That is what I supposed was the case, that Mr. Marsh was the trader Uvtuif
in New York substantially, whether in form or not; and he had the control ot toe
place as evidenced by the fact of his receiving this large tribute.

O. As you supposed ?


As was true, and seemed to be understood.

Q. Suppose the case had been exactly the reverse, and you supposed that Mr.
Evans had control of it and was the trader, and not Marsh ; would your order have
been drawn any difterently f

A. I do not know. 1/themanvHureeiding atthepott,Idonotthinkitv>ouldhave
tugaetted ititelf to my mind to toy he should go there,

Q- That is one thing. Now let me call your attention to the first part of this or<
der, to see if that is not the material partof it after alL Please read the first clause
of the order.

A. Itls—

"I. The council of administration at a post where there is a post-trader will from
time to time examine the post- trader's goods and invoices or bills of sale; and will,
subject to the approval of the post-commander, establish the rates and prices (which
should be foir and reasonable) at which the goods shall be sold. A copy of the list
thus established will be kept posted in the trader's store. Should the post-trader
feel himself aggrieved by the action of the council of administration, he may appeal
therefrom through the post-commander to the War Department"

Q. Now I want to know why that order would not have corrected the abuse there
without regard to whether the trader Uved at the post or not, if the order had been
executed by that council ?

A. Very likely it might have done so.

Q. Would it not have done so t

A. I do not know.

Q. Can yoQ conceive how it could fail to do ft f

A. Yes; because it has failed.

Ite-examined by Mr. Manager McMahon :

Q. Did I understand you to say that General Belknap told yon he had appointed

A. He told me that he had offered the place to Marsh; I think he said he had
offered it or had appointed him. and he told me why, under what circumstances.

^ What were tnose circumstances ? What circumstances did he toll you I
It was something b aring on the relations between Mr. Marsh and his wife.
Friendly relations between them ?
Relations of kindness while she was sick.

Q. Do yon reminnber tJhe time that she was siokt

A. I do not.

Q. In this interview between yon and General Belknap, did he make any allnslon,
or did you, to the fact that Evans was paying Marsh 112,000, as stated in that Trib-
une article?

A. I made it in the beginning of my conversation with him.

Q. What did the general say in auMwer ?

A. I cannot recollect that he said anything in answer to that, further than to
ask me to draw up such an order as would correct the abuse which I had stated to
him, that complained of .

Q. Did he request yon then to draw np an order to correct the pajrment by Evans
to Marsh of 113,000 a year ?

A. No, sir.

What has heeonie of the deht of gratitude to Mrs. Marsh for her
kindness to Mrs. Belknap in her illness f The natural expression of
oblij^ation would have heen to her. Marsh was about his business and
at his store. Suppose, Senators, that the defendant had told General
McDowell the truth, as he now claims it and as is abundantly estab-
lished by the evidence — suppose he had said, '* General, I promised
the place to Marsh, who had no support, in consideration of his kind-
ness to my wife when ill at his house in September, 1870 f At the re-
quest of Marsh I appointed Evans, which Marsh stated would be more
convenient to him at present. Evans has paid Marsh $12,000 per year,
as stated in the Tribune article. One-half of that sum Marsh has
sent to me quarterly in advance : the first $1,500 for my wife, the next
two payments of $1,500 each for my child, and since the decease of
the child the like quarterly payments have been made to me for my
own use and I have received and used the money, * asking no questions
for couscienco sake.' '' • If he had said this, does any Senator or any one
who hears me suppose that General McDowell would have drawn the
onler of March SS I On the contrary, he would have fled from the
War Department as from a pestilence, knowing that his kind offices
would no longer be of any avail to the defendant. But the defend-
ant concealed the truth, and, as I have already said, allowed General
McDowell to act upon a mistaken theory, and that is the reason why
the order made, and which it was supposed would correct the evil,
in no manner reached it except to work the reduction from twelve to
six thousand dollars. The onler did not in fact accomplish that. It
was the alarm created by the Tribune exposure and the fear that if
twelve thousand continued to be exacted from the soldiers it would
inevitably lead to an investigation and would develop the monstrous
iniquity and fraud with which the whole scheme leading to the ap-
pointment of Evuns was tainted.

Senators, in this connection I will call your attention for a moment
to the evidence of General Hazen. He appears to have been an ear-
nest supporter of the policy of the law of 1866 or 1867, which made
provision that soldiers should be supplied with goods at cost. He
estimates that it would have been a saving of two millions annually.
Having command at Fort Sill and learning the complaints there about
Evans, he wrote the facts upon which the article in the Tribune was
based. He was summoned and appeared before a committee of the
House and gave his testimony. Although that evidence has been ex-
eluded on this trial, it is evident the defendant knew what it was.
He also knew, for he complained of the fact, that Hazen inspired the
article in the Tribune. Yet the defendant never made any inquiry
of Mr. Smalley, the correspondent here who wrote the article, or of
Whitelaw Reid who published it. He asked General Grierson for
a report which he received before the order of the 25th of March, and
upon which, as I have stated, no official action was ever taken. The

Digitized by




letters of Qeneral Hazen, written since to the defendant and to Mr.
Clymer, are put in evidence to destroy his credit. I snhmit, Senators,
that the letter to the defendant, written at his request after the
Secretary had seen Hazen and frowned upon him as a military su-
perior, so far from detracting from the credit due to General Hozen,
strongly supports him for his sincerity and his subordination to su-
perior authority. Even Qeneral Grierson, as Senators will remember,
states in his answer of the 28th of February, 1872 :

I h%yo repeatedly urged them—

Evans & Co. —

to represent this matter in writinir to me, in order that I miffbt lay the matter be-
fore the proper authority to reliere the command of this burden, upon whom it
evidently falls; but they declined to do so, ttating thoX they /tared their permit to

trade tooiUd be taken from thent.

As the prices could not be regulated by a council of administration, the trader
not bein^c a sutler, it has be^i contemplated by some of the officers of tbe garrison
to represent thts matter, without reference to J. S. Evans, through the proper mil-
itary channels, but as it was claimed that Uio authority for the trader^hlp ema-
nated ftt>m the Secretary of War U toas feared that that cotiree might be conetnied at
toting exoeption to the amon qf euperior authority.

Here is the same fear of superior authority expressed and exhibited
by Hazen. A great and insufferable evil could not be even reported
to the Secretary of War through military channels without fear that
the course might be construed as taking exception to the action of su-
perior authority ; a very delicate hint by General Grierson, ns the
request of the Secretary gave him the opportunity to make It, that
the Secretary probably knew all about the matter and it had received
his sanction.

Why, I repeat again, Senators, did the defendant pass by this most
important letter ind the terrible disclosures it contained without ac-
tion and without any instructions to General Grierson to conxjct the
evil f There is, there can be no o^her answer than the one disclosed
hf the case, that he had appointed Evans at Marsh's request and for
his benefit, as an act of kindness to hiro, and that Marsh was remit-
ting to him quo.rterly one-half of the $12,000 he received from Evans.

Mr. Marsh st>atee that ho was accustomed when he received a lemit-
tance from Evans under the contract of the 8th of Oct<»ber, 1870, to
write the defendant in substance, ** I have a remittance for yon from
the S. W. ; how shall I send it ?" He states that in answer thereto
he received instruction by mail to send by express or by certilic»t«
of deposit or to purchase a government bond, or to hold the money
to bo paid personally, and in one Instance to be paid to the wife of
the defendant. The defendant admitted the receipt by an " O. K.,"
and his letters as received were destroyed by Marsh. In one or the
other of these modes Marsh states he remitted and paid to the defend-
ant one-half of all the money he received from Evans. We show by
Evans and Fisher that $3,000 was sent by them to Marsh quart'Crly
up to Febniary, 1872, and semi-annually afterwonl down to the fall
of 1875, including an advance to Febniary, 1876. Their accounts are
brought to coafirm the correctness of their statements. Marsh states
that he depositod the money in the National Bank of Commerce, Now
York, and checked it out for the nurpose of paying the defendant.
We show by the books of that bank and the evidence of the assistant
cashier, Mr. King, that Marsh mode deposits corresponding j^encrally
with the remittances of Evans and drew checks corresponding gen-
erally with the payments to the defendant.

The witness identifies four certificates of deposit. One for $1,500,
dated November 10, 1871, is indorsed by Marsh to the defendant, and
by the defendant to C. F. Emery, by whom we prove he loaned the
money at the request of the defendant in Iowa upon a note and mort-
gage haviug three years to run ; that the loan has been renewed for
three years more, and the interest notes on the renewal are made
payable to the defendant's present wife, but the original mortgage
and note are in the defendant's name. Since Marsh has testified that
the defendant's present wife was never to have any interest in this
money, and that all which was sent after the death of the defendant's
child in 1871 was for the defendant's use, we do not regard this
change in the interest notes as of any importance. Another certifi-
cate for $1,500, dated January 18, 187^, indorsed by Marsh to the de-
fendant. This we trace by the evidence of Mr. William H. Barnard,
the clerk of the receiver of the First National Bank of Washington,
and, by a deposit ticket, in the handwriting of the defendant, into his
private account in that bank on the 2l)t.h of January, 1872, and Mr.
Barnard identifies the last-named certificate as being part of such
deposit and as having passed through the bank, as the indorsement
upon it shows. The other two are certificates dated October 9, 1874,
one for seven and the other for eight hundred dollars, both indorsed
by Marsh to the defendant, and by him indorsed to other parties.

We also show by the ofilcers of the Adams Express Company the
receipt of money packages by express to the defendant from Marsh
and from R. G. Carey ^ Co., the firm of Mr. Marsh, in whose name
he states some of the later remittances were made, as follows : No-
vember 1, 1870, $1,500, receipted by defendant in person ; January 17,
1871, $1,500, receipted by tlie defendant; April 17, 1871, $1,500, re-
ceipted by the defendant; November 4, 1873, §1,500, delivered to Mr.
Crosby for the defendant ; April 10, 1874, $1,500, from Carey &, Co.,
receipted by Barnard for the defendant ; May 24, 1875, $1,500 from
Carey Sl Co., receipted by Crosby; November 8, 1875, $500 from
Carey d& Co., receipted by defendant. We prove by Crosby and Bar-
nard thfit they wore clerks in the defendant's ofiQce, and authorized
to receive and receipt packages for him. Mr. Marsh states that he

paid the last half of $1,500 to the present wife of the defendant by
his direction at the Saint James Hot^l in New York in November or
Decemlier, 1875. We show the defendant to have been in New York at
several times when payments were coming from Evans, and Marsh
states that except as he sent by express or certificate of deposit or
the purchase of a Government bond, he paid the defendant person-
ally and generally in New York.

I should weary the patience of the Senate if I pursued this inquiry
in detail any further. The evidenee of these quarterly payment-s
down to Febroary, 1872, and of the half-yearly payments from that
time down to November, 1875, is so full and complete as to leave no
room for doubt on the subject, and Marsh is so completely confirmed
by the evidence as to leave no question as to his being entitled to
credit for all he doos remember. He is not a willing, but, on the con-
trary, a reluctant witness. We show by Mr. Clymer that in the gen-
eral statement he prepared he failed directly to implicate the defend-
ant. It was only by direct questions that the facts were drawn out.
The case discloses he was anxious to so adjust matters as to save ex-
posure. His letter to the committee before the examination, which
was read to the defendant, discloses that fact. When pressed, he

If I swear I shall tell the trath, and that will rain Secretary Belknap.

When, therefore, the witness Marsh gives it as his best recollection
he conversed with the defendant on the evening of his wife's funeral
and was directed by him about sending the money, we submit he is
entitled to belief, affhough his memory is vague on the subject. The
subsequent acts of the parties fully confirm him in such statement.

When asked by us whether the defendant knew from what source
this money came, the witness Marsh answered :

I ahonld say that I presume he did.

Standing by itself this would not be a venr satisfactory item of evi-
dence, but the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. Howe] and the Sena-
tor from Iowa [Mr. Wright] addressed to him the following ques-
tions, and the answer of Marsn, especially to the last question, throws
a flood of light upon this case:

Mr. nowE. If the court has not dosed its case, I should like to hare tho ques-
tion answ ered which I send to the Chair.

Tho Prksidiemt pro tempore. The question of the Senator from Wisconsin will
bo read.

Tho Chief Clerk reatl as follows:

Q. Wofl tho money which jon sent to General Belknap designed for his use or
for the use of some other person t

A. I sent it to hiro originally according to what I have heretofore stated occnrred
on the night of the funeral, ft ma^' bo pn^snmed that it was sent for the child, but
I continued sending It after the child's death to the General, and I always pre-
sumed it was for him.

Mr. WuKiUT. I have a question I wish to propound, and I will read it in the
iirnt instance, as it is not very legible.

Q. Tou sixid on yesterday that you presumed that General Belknap knew from
whom the money sent him was received. Now state what led you to so presume,
or upon what you based this presumption.

Mr. Carpentbr. We object to this question. Let it be read again.

The PRB8IDBNT pro tempore. The qnestion will l>e read by the Secretary.

The Chief Clerk read the interrogatory of Mr. Wuioiit.

The question being put, was decitled in the affirmative.

The PttSsmBNT pro tetMore. The witues.H will answer the question.

The WiTXBKS. I said I presumed he knew where it came from.

Mr. Cari'ENTBIL Now it appears there was a roisuke, as I thought The
question does not correctly state the case to the witness. The question and answer
yesterday were exactly tms:

*' Q. Did General Belknap at this time know where the money was coming from
that was being paid to him f *

*'A. I should say that I presume he did."

The PUB8IDRNT pro tempore. The question will be answered. It will be read
again to witness.

The Chief Clerk again read the question of Mr. Wright, as follows :

Online LibraryUnited States. CongressCongressional record : proceedings and debates of the ... Congress → online text (page 137 of 172)