"' V 
 
 v^ 
 
 'O^ *-8,, 
 
 »' ^0-^ 
 
 :^^' :.W^ 
 
 ^'^ « 
 
 % J^ 
 
 \..^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \/' *■ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ '^^^S^ /\. ^^:^ 4^^^ 
 
 
 
 <* ®^ *'■' ^^ K^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .'?."' 
 
 ■^ 
 
 
 o a"' 
 
 .0^ 
 
 .0 
 
 ^^'^;^ 
 -«-. 
 
 0'' 
 
 
 c" 
 
 ,•=!'* 
 
 
 
 "■'M. 
 
 o 
 
 u " 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -■^ \i^ 
 
^^ oTU\\^$> V k\^ 
 
 
 •■' ^^ ^%s^S^^ 
 
 ■/ .> 
 
 V 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 
 >"-ni. 
 
 <^' 5 ' ' I- "^ 
 
 
 "9^ *». 
 
 ^ ... V. '^"^ ^\^ ., -u^ 
 
 ;-' .0- 
 
 <^. 
 
 ^' 
 
 t^' A 
 
 '^'- ^ « ^' f'A -^f ^ 
 
 .'^•^ *w^^ -^^ 
 
 c 
 
 
 'i7c 
 
 
 
 
 A O 
 
 
 
 
 
 'o> 
 
 
 
 *_/iAi/£>I*> ' 
 

 V 
 
 
 !) • 
 
 .0^^ 
 
/ 
 
 REPLY 
 
 THE REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE 
 OF THE SENATE 
 
 ©nittjsipovtisi for the Mwx ^cpavtmcnt. 
 
 B Y 
 
 JOHN TUCKER, 
 
 (LATE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF WAR.) 
 
 Webrtiary "ITf, ISG3. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA : 
 
 MOSS & CO 
 1863. 
 
REPLY X 
 
 iL 
 
 
 THE REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE 
 
 OF THE SENATE i <:> 7 
 
 %xm9im\^ im \\\t Wav §,einirtiiient* 
 
 B T 
 
 JOHN TUCKER, 
 
 (LATE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF WAR.) 
 
 Vchruary 27, IS63. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA : 
 
 MOSS & CO 
 1863. 
 
8^ 
 
 
 -5 y /' 
 
Philadelphia, February 27, 1863. 
 
 HoxN. E. M. STANTON, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 Sir: 
 
 I have only to-day succeeded in procuring a copy 
 of the testimony taken by the Select Committee of the 
 Senate on Transport Vessels for the War Department, 
 on which their statements and conclusions are based. 
 I preferred delay in answering the Report, that I 
 might discover whether such gross perversion of the 
 facts was due to the committee or the witnesses. In 
 this answer I shall have occasion to quote largely from 
 both the Report and the testimony. I believe the 
 testimony of all the witnesses examined is a better 
 vindication of myself than anything which can be 
 written. I therefore invite the closest scrutiny and 
 criticism of the evidence. 
 
 The serious facts, so far as I am concerned, pre- 
 sented by this Report, although not conveyed in the 
 form of a direct allegation, are, that I have been guilty 
 of a wasteful and reckless expenditure of the public 
 money, and am a participant in the charters of trans- 
 ports during the period I was Transportation Agent 
 and Assistant Secretary of War. I feel that it is due 
 to the peoj)le of the United States, to you and myself, 
 to answer these charges with the gravity becoming 
 the character of the issues involved. 
 
 I shall comment on the various allusions made to 
 
{ 4 ) 
 
 myself in the order in which they are introduced by 
 the committee. 
 
 The first mention of my name is under the heading, 
 " Charles Coblens and John F. Pickrill of Baltimore." 
 Among the list of offences of the former, he is charged 
 with being " a Prussian by birth, and an Israelite by 
 descent, a peddler and a horse jockey by j)rofession." 
 Neither of these witnesses were interrogated with re- 
 ference to any transactions with myself, except the 
 general question put to all the witnesses, to which I 
 shall directly refer. Yet in this connection my name 
 is introduced with reference to the barge "Delaware," 
 chartered for the McClellan Ex^^edition at $70 per day. 
 The RejDort states that these gentlemen subsequently 
 became the owners of the vessel, which was entirely 
 unknown to me till I saw their Report. 
 
 The committee, after exhibiting their estimate of 
 the profits for three hundred and sixty-five days, the 
 barge having been chartered for only thirty days, it 
 being at the option of the Department to retain her 
 longer in the service, observe : " That this chapter of 
 fraud may want no odious and shameless features, Mr. 
 Hall afiirms, Capt. Hodges and Mr. Tucker thought 
 she was the cheapest thing they chartered." 
 
 I may be permitted to express surprise that the 
 Senate committee should quote and use the evidence 
 of a witness they immediately proceed to charge with 
 perjury. But I will apjDly the facts to the case. I 
 will here remark, the intrinsic or permanent value of 
 a transport did not control or even influence the price 
 paid. This was governed by the efficiency or capacity 
 of the vessel for the exceedingly temporary service then 
 required, viz : TransjDortation from Perryville and 
 Annapolis to Urbana, near the mouth of the Rappa- 
 
( 5 ) 
 
 hannock river, a distance of about one hundred miles. 
 By reference to the original record, I find the barge 
 Delaware was chartered w^itli a steam tog at $115 j^er 
 day. The rated or estimated capacity of the service 
 of the two was 1000 men, or 125 horses and 300 men. 
 The Delaware was a very large, capacious barge, with 
 three decks ; she had been fitted, furnished and used 
 for large excursion parties. It has never been reported 
 she was inadequate to the estimated service. If per- 
 formed, which I have no reason to doubt, I now assert 
 that, for the particular service required, these v/ere the 
 cheapest transports chartered, although I do not re- 
 member ever before to have so stated. 
 
 The original record also shovrs, that the charter 
 money first united in one contract was subsequently 
 divided, and $70 allowed for the barge and $45 for the 
 tug. I cannot remember that this was an act of mine, 
 but as the services of the two might not be constantly 
 required together, the separation was manifestly pro- 
 per, and I will assume any responsibility connected 
 with it. 
 
 2d. The next allusion to me is under the same head- 
 ing. The committee, after characterizing the alliance 
 between Coblens and Pickrill as " nefarious," remark : 
 *' The only person connected with the government, 
 who enjoyed the acquaintance of Mr. Pickrill before 
 the breaking out of the rebellion, was John Tucker, 
 late Assistant Secretary of War, who testifies that he 
 has known Pickrill eight or nine years, and that he 
 has had business transactions Vvuth him." 
 
 The question put by the committee to me was, 
 "Have you ever had transactions with him in years 
 gone hij?'' The answer was, "Yes, sir." 
 
 This business acquaintance, made eight or nine 
 
( 6 ) 
 
 years ago, I did not hesitate to admit to the commit- 
 tee, or now to readily own to the world. I could not, 
 when before the committee, and cannot now, see the 
 connection between that transaction and Mr. Pickrill's 
 recent contracts with the government. The business 
 with Mr. Pickrill, eight or nine years ago, led to much 
 of my professional intercourse with you ; hence no 
 one is a better judge than yourself whether there was 
 anything in it Avhich was " neflirious," immoral or 
 improper. We both knoio there was not. 
 
 The Su])reme Court of the United States has just 
 adjudicated the question, and decided it to have been 
 at least legal. 
 
 od. The next connection in which my name is 
 used, is with reference to the charters with Mr. A. C. 
 Hall, of Baltimore. The committee state : 
 
 MR. AMASA C. HALL, OF BALTIMORE. 
 
 Mr. Ainasa C. Hall, of Ealtiuiore, lias played a very couspienous 
 part in connection with the chartering of transport vessels at that 
 jiort. Hardly any vessel has been chartered there during the past 
 eighteen months, that has not been secured through his agency, and 
 of these earnings, from five to twelve per cent, has found its way to 
 his pocket. During that time it has been understood among ship- 
 owners, agents and brokers, that no vessel could secure a charter of 
 the Quartermaster at Baltimore, unless she was offered by Mr. 
 Hall ; and several of them testify that, knowing this, they were 
 compelled, much against their will, to resort to him to do their 
 business. 
 
 So singularly exclusive w\as the monopoly of this business enjoyed 
 by Hall, that it at length attracted the attention of the Quarter- 
 master-General, who called Col. J'elger's attention to it by two 
 letters, printed in connection with his testimony. Assistant Secre- 
 tory Tucker's attention was also called to it more than once by Gen. 
 Meigs (sec Gen. Meigs's testimony,) but, neither of those officers 
 seemed to have made special effort to correct the abuse. The 
 evidence furnished by Hall himself in his letter to Col. Belger, 
 throws much light on the otherwise intricate question of his mono- 
 poly. He says, " The Hon. John Tucker, Assistant Secretary of 
 War, is aware of, and fully understands the nature of my business 
 transactions with the Government as an agent for the owners and 
 masters of vessels, and I would respectfully refer to him for any 
 
( 7 ) 
 
 information that Gen. Meigs, Quartermaster-General, may require." 
 This intimation seems to have put a stop to further grumbling, and 
 Mr. Hall went on as prosperously as before. 
 
 After commenting on the large commissions earned 
 by Mr. Hall, the committee remark : 
 
 It is no apology for either Mr. Tucker or Col. Belger for them to 
 say that they did not know, until a recent period, that such commis- 
 sions were charged. It was their duty to exercise at least ordinary 
 care, attention, and diligence. They should have known, what seems 
 to have been well known by every man connected with the transport 
 business in Baltimore. They were bound to know the character and 
 the conduct of the man they intrusted with public business of such 
 magnitude. 
 
 Again : 
 
 The committee have endeavored to discover the motives which led 
 to the employment of Hall. Be says himself that some one recom- 
 mended him to Col. Belger as a suitable person to charter vessels; 
 but he is profoundly ignorant of the name of the person who thus 
 recommended him. The inference fairly deducible from the first fif- 
 teen pages of the testimony of Col. Belger would bo, that this valu- 
 able friend of Mr. Hall was the late Assistant Seci-etary of War, Mr. 
 -Tohu Tucker ; for Belger testifies that when he went to Baltiiuore, 
 ho " went there a stranger, and Tucker expressed such confidence in 
 him (Hall), giving him those charters to make up, and he having 
 acted hn- Capt. Hodges in New York, I thought he was the very 
 man for me to employ. Capt. Hodges was the Quartermaster at 
 New York for that duty." It should be borne in mind, however, 
 that Col. Belger was totally mistaken as to the capacity in which 
 Capt. Hodges acted in chartering vessels at New York. He was en- 
 tirely subordinate to Mr. Tucker, and only placed his signature to 
 charters already effected by the Assistant Secretary, for the purpose 
 of giving them an official sanction. He had no power to select, in- 
 spect or charter, save as personally directed by Mr. Tucker, and 
 acted in all cases precisely as Belger said he did in nineteen out of 
 twenty of the charters he elfccted, viz : as the mere clerical agent of 
 Tucker. Belger says that nineteen-twentieths of the charters he 
 signed were made "by Hall, by the direction of jMr. Tucker." When 
 it is remembered that, according to Belger's report, appended to his 
 testimony, the number of charters efiected by him was 384, and that 
 nineteen- tv.'entieths of these, according to his statement, were really 
 cftectcd by Hall, at the instance of Tucker, though signed by Bel- 
 ger, an estimate may be formed of the magnitude and value of Hall's 
 business. If Belger's statement be true, not less than oGO of these 
 vessels were thus chartered by him, under direction of Tucker, upon 
 all of which Hall has received, is receiving, or is to receive, a com- 
 mission of not less than five per cent, of their gross earnings. 
 
( 8 ) 
 
 Here is a labored effort to connect me vvith the 
 daily current business of the Quartermaster's Depart- 
 ment in Baltimore, and especially of that with Mr. 
 Hall. 
 
 It is true, the Quartermaster General inquired of me 
 why it was that Mr. Hall chartered so large a propor- 
 tion of the transports in Baltimore. I replied to the 
 effect I was not aware of it, and know of no reason why 
 it should be so. In the midst of numerous avocations 
 and cares, the inquiry made no impression on my mind, 
 as I did not then, and do not now suppose that the 
 Quartermaster General regarded me as having any- 
 thing more to do with the current business of his De- 
 partment in Baltimore than in Portland or San Fran- 
 cisco.' I know you did not, and I did not assume it, as 
 will appear by reference to the testimony of Colonel 
 Belger, Quartermaster at Baltimore. His evidence is 
 this : 
 
 Question to Col. Belger by tlie cou)mittec. Then your charters, 
 wWcli were made iudependent of Mr. Tucker, were also made through 
 Mr. Hall, as well as those made under the direction of Mr. Tucker? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. I don't know anything about Mr. Tucker ; 
 but whenever I wanted a vessel of Mr. Hall, I would say to him, I 
 want a vessel, and I don't v/ant to go into the market for it ; you go 
 and pick me out such a vessel, and charter it at the lowest rate.* 
 
 The following simple narrative of my transactions 
 with Mr. Hall, will therefore not surprise you, al- 
 though w^erc it not for my testimony and other evi- 
 dence before the committee, I should suppose it would 
 astound them. 
 
 The committee state : *' Hardly any vessel had 
 been chartered there (Baltimore) during the last 
 
 * The name of Mr. Hall does not appear in Col. Belger s Report as char- 
 tering vessels after the second letter of the Quartermaster General, who 
 understood that the employment of Mr. Hall was arrested by his letters. 
 
( 9 ) 
 
 eighteen months that has not been secured during his 
 (Hall's) agency." They then allude to the exclusive- 
 ness of the monopoly, after v/Iiich they remark : '' The 
 inference faij^ly deducible from the first fifteen pages 
 of the testimony of Col. Belger, would be that this 
 valuable friend of Mr. Hall was the late Assistant Se- 
 cretary of War, John Tucker." 
 
 The report is without date. It appeared in the New 
 York Tribune on the 10 ih instant. I le;irn it was sub- 
 mitted to the Senate on the 8th, although a part of 
 the evidence was procured February 9th. Therefore, 
 according to the inferences of the committee, I must 
 have introduced Mr. Hall to this valuable monopoly 
 about the 8th or 10th of August, 1861. 
 
 The testimony reported by them proved this utterly 
 impossible. 
 
 The committee examine Mr. Hall as follows : 
 
 P. 102. Question. When did you begin to have any connection 
 with furnishing transportation for the United States array ? 
 
 Answer. I think it was in August, 1861. 
 
 Question. What was the first vessel you furnished ? 
 
 Answer. I cannot now state the first vessel ; luy impression is, it 
 was either the steamer Pocahontas or the Georgia. 
 
 P. 104. Question. AVhcn did you begin to act for the Govern- 
 ment ? 
 
 Answer. In August, 1861, 1 think. 
 
 Question. How came you to be employed for this purpose? 
 
 Answer. I have been in the steamboat and commission business 
 for the last thirteen years. I was agent for a line of steamers in 
 New York six years before going to Baltimore. Then I came on 
 and took charge of the line of steamers from Charleston to Balti- 
 more, and from Baltimore to New York : that was clianged to the 
 Cromwell's line of steamers. I was agent for them when they were 
 first established, until the Government took the vessels, a short time 
 previous to the time I have mentioned. Some one recommended me 
 to Colonel Belger as being a suitable person. 
 
 Question. Who was that person who recommended you? 
 
 Answer. I do not know. Colonel Belger sent for me to come to 
 the ofiice, and said I had been recommended to him. 
 
( 10 ) 
 
 Pao'e 107. Referrino- to Mr. Hall's first interview 
 with me, the committee ask him — 
 
 Question. How did it happen that you went to meet him in Phila- 
 delphia, or that you met him at Philadelphia ? 
 
 Answer. Some time in the month of February, 18G2 ; the first of 
 February, I think, the Secretary of War, ]\Ir. Stanton, advertised 
 for proposals for vessels of different classes — different grades — 
 steamers, tug-boats, and sailing vessels. I saw the advertisement, 
 and I answered the advertisement, stating that I could furnish so 
 many steamers, so many tug-boats, and so many vessels. Then I 
 went to Washington, and there I met Mr. Tucker at Willard's 
 Hotel. He was then, I believe, Assistant Secretary of War. I 
 shovred him the schedule I had. That was on Friday night. He 
 remarked to me then that Captain Hodges and himself had been ap- 
 pointed a committee, or agents, to get up an expedition, and they 
 wanted such and such vessels of such and such dimensions, decks, 
 and capacities for carrying mules and horses, and steamboats for 
 carrying troops. He wanted to know how many I could furnish, 
 and I told him I could not tell exactly, but in a day or so I could 
 give all the names of the different vessels. He asked me if I could 
 get the information and have it so he could get it in Philadelphia on 
 Monday ; for me to meet him at his office. I told him I thought I 
 could. I went home on the six o'clock train on Saturday morning, 
 and went to work ; got the names of the vessels ; saw the owners 
 and parties, and got the dimensions ; and Sunday night T v/ent to 
 Philadelphia and saw Captain Hodges and Mr. Tucker. Captain 
 Leper was there at the time. I had the names and dimensions of 
 the vessels. 
 
 P. 100. Question. Do you know if any arrangement or under- 
 standing, tacit or implied, written or oral, by which you shoidd be 
 employed in preference to any one else. 
 
 Answer. No, sir. T do not think there was ever in the world any 
 understanding of that kind. 
 
 The point which I wi^Ii to establish is, that neither 
 Col. Eelger nor Mr. Hall had any transactions with 
 mo prior to the McClellan Expedition, which was 
 ordered by the President January 20th, 1862. 
 
 P. 117. (Question. Did you charter vessels for them (Kclscy and 
 Grey), for the McClellan Expedition '? 
 
 Answer. I took vessels they had to come to them. 
 
 Question. Any for the Burnside expedition ? 
 
 P. 113 and 114. Answer. No, sir. The Burnside Expedition 
 I had nothing to do with. 
 
 (The Burnside Expedition sailed January 20, 18G2.) 
 
 P. 130. Question. How came Mr. Tucker to employ you? 
 
 Answer. It was through this advertisement of Mr. Stanton's. 
 
 i 
 
( 11 ) 
 
 Question. How do you know it was tbrougli that ? 
 
 Answer. I think it was through that, because I never saw Mr. 
 Tucker in my life until I sent this letter in answer to tliat adver- 
 tisement of Mr. Stanton. 
 
 Question. Was not that advertisement ausv.'cred by other mer- 
 chants, shippers, &c,, in Baltimore ? 
 
 Answer. I cannot say whether anybody answered it except my- 
 self, or not. I saw the advertisement, and took a great deal of 
 pains to get the information, and reported to him. That was the 
 only thing I know of that brought me in contact with Mr. Tucker 
 and the War Department. It was my answer to that advertisement. 
 
 P. 164. Quoslion. Did 3-ou charter any vessel for the liurnside 
 Expedition I 
 
 Answer. Not any; only my two tugs. 
 (These two tugs were chartered by General Eurnsidc at Annapolis.) 
 
 IN MY OWN EXAMINATION. 
 
 P. 342. Question. IIow manv vessels have you chartered througii 
 A. C. Hall, of Baltimore ? 
 
 Answer. I could not answer that without referring to that list ; 
 I am very confident that the first time I ever saw Mr. Hall was in 
 Pliiladelphia. When I began to charter vessels for the McClellau Ex- 
 pedition he came to me and ofiercd mc a number of steamers : that 
 was in February, iyG2. 
 
 Question. Where 1 
 
 Answer. In Philadelphia, at my office ; it was the first time I ever 
 met him, to the best of my recollection. 
 
 Question. Who introduced him to you ? 
 
 Answer. I could not tell you now, sir ; I do not remember. 
 
 Question. Did he bring any letter to you '. 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. Did you know nothing of him before ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir ; he had brought a description of a large num- 
 ber of canal boats — Schuylkill canal boats — and oflered them to me 
 at a price which we did not agree about. I had a fixed price for all 
 I chartered — ten dollars a day. He demanded twelve ; I told him ' 
 I could not change the price. He went back to Baltimore, and, by 
 return of mail, informed me that T could have them at ten dollars a 
 day -, I answered that at that price I v»-ould take all that he could 
 get. 
 
 Question. Did you sec him at the War Department before you 
 saw him at Pliiladelphia at that time : 
 
 Answer. I think not ; I have no recollection of ever seeing him 
 until that occasion. 
 
 Question. You are confident that jon did not advise him to go on 
 and meet you at Philadelphia at that time ? 
 
 Answer. Oh, yes, sir. 
 
 Question. Did you ever see him at Annapolis ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
( 12 ) 
 
 Question. Was he introduced to you by Captain Loper 1 
 Answer. He might have been, but I don't remember it. 
 
 From Mr. Hall's testimony it would appear that 
 my first interview with him was on the evening I left 
 Washington, February 21, 1862, to charter the 
 Transports for the M'Clelkn Expedition, instead of 
 the Monday following, February 24, 1862. When 
 before the committee, I did not recollect that inter- 
 view, and do not now. It was not such a one as 
 would impress it on my memory. 
 
 (Page o4G.) Question (To Mr. Tucker.) Your business at 
 Baltimore was mostly done through Mr. Hall ? 
 
 Answer. He came to me at Philadelphia with a list of steamers at 
 a time when I wanted everything that I could get that was suitable. 
 
 Question. From that time on he has been in the habit of furnish- 
 ing the government vessels ? 
 
 Answer. Very few to me, sir, or through me. 
 
 Question. But to the government ? 
 
 Answer. I do not know what he has done through the quarter- 
 masters. 
 
 Question. Did you give Major Belger any orders to charter from 
 Hall ? 
 
 Answer. I may have given some few orders to Major Belger. 
 
 Question. Do you remember the time when you gave Major 
 Belger orders to charter vessels of Mr. Hall 1 
 
 Answer. No, sir ; I don't recollect having given such orders ; 
 although, if Mr. Hall had come to me and offered a transport which 
 the government was in want of, and I knew it was a proper one and 
 at a fair price, I may have directed Major Belger to execute the 
 charter parties. 
 
 Question. Did you ever give Major Belger a general direction to 
 charter through Mr. Hall 1 
 
 Answer. Oh no, sir '? 
 
 Question. Did you ever intimate to him that you would prefer 
 that he should charter through Hall 1 
 
 Answer. Most decidedly not, sir. 
 
 €juestion. Was the fact of the chartering of these vessels through 
 Plall ever brought to your attention '? 
 
 Answer. The quartermaster general has spoken to me of that 
 fact j he did not luiderstaud why so many vessels were so chartered. 
 
 Question. When did the quartermaster general first speak to you 
 upon this subject ! 
 
 Answer. 1 think it was five or six months ago, in a casual 
 conversation. 
 
( 13 ) 
 
 Question. How do jow account for the fact that all the vessels 
 were chartered through Mr. Hall at Baltimore ? 
 
 Answer. I was not and am not now aware that that is the fact. 
 
 Question. I think it is pretty nmch the fact. 
 
 Answer. I had no idea of it, sir. 
 
 Question. I understand you to say that you never gave any order 
 to Colonel Belgcr, or intimated any desire to him, that he should 
 charter vessels through Mr. Hnll, 
 
 Answer. I may have given him orders to charter a particular ves- 
 sel ; but I never expressed any desire that Mr. Hall should have 
 any preference over anybody. That I am positive about. 
 
 Question. When the quartermaster general brought the fact to 
 your attention that there were complaints about Hall having the 
 chartering of vessels in Baltimore, did you take any steps to prevent 
 it'? 
 
 Answer. No sir ; I did not consider 'it my duty. 
 
 Question. Had you not the subject of transports under your 
 charge ? 
 
 Answer. Not generally, sir. 
 
 Question. What was your specific duty in the War Department, 
 or was it general ? 
 
 Answer. It was general ; but I was sent off in these emer- 
 gencies. 
 
 Question. Would you as readily have chartered vessels of the 
 owners as of A. C. Hall, of Baltimore ? 
 
 xinswer. Certainly. If you will refer to my report, you will see 
 that the government advertised its wants, and directed them to 
 apply, and preferred dealing with the owners. 
 
 Question. You know of nothing that Mr. Hall has done to entitle 
 him to a brokerage from individuals ] 
 
 Answer. I do not, farther than the owners seem to have em- 
 ployed him. 
 
 Question. Did you know that the owners had employed him ? 
 
 Answer. I know in regard to these canal boats. I supposed that 
 in regard to these canal boats that the captains employed him to 
 represent them. 
 
 Question. If you knew that, why did you not charter them 
 dii'ectly from the captains ? 
 
 Answer. I would have been very glad to have done that, but 
 they were in Baltimore, I was in Philadelphia, and the time was a 
 most important element. 
 
 Question. How soon did you want them after they were char- 
 tered ? 
 
 Answer. Instanter. 
 
 Question. Do you remember the day on which they were char- 
 tered ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. Do you remember how soon they were used after they 
 were chartered ? 
 
( 14 ) 
 
 Answer. I do not ; I only knew I was extremely anxious to get 
 them into service. 
 
 Question. How soon after they were chartered were the}- 
 used '? 
 
 Answer. I should think within four days a portion of those barges 
 were on their way from Baltimore to Perryville. 
 
 (Page 351.) Question. I think you testified that you never gave 
 any direction to Colonel Belger to charter of Mr. Hall 1 
 
 Answer. As I said before, I may have done so in some particular 
 case. 
 
 Question. You gave no such general direction ? 
 
 Answer. I have no recollection of it. I am very sure I did not. 
 
 Question. When it was brought to your attention that he was 
 chartering vessels, and that nobody else in Baltimore was, you did 
 not believe that you had authority to cliangc it ? 
 
 Answer. Tliat was never brought to my attention — that he was 
 chartering all the vessels. I never was aware of that. ]My recollec- 
 tion is, that in a casual conversation with General Meigs, he spoke 
 of Mr. Hall's appearing to be doing a very large business in 
 Baltimore. 
 
 The Committee having referred to the testimotiy 
 of the Quartermaster General with reference to the 
 monopoly of the business in Baltimore, and my 
 knowledge of it, I wdll give General Meigs's evidence 
 on this subject in full. 
 
 (Page 294) Washington, Friday, Janunry 30, 18G3. 
 
 Brigadier General Montgomery C. Meigs recalled, testified 
 further as follows : — 
 
 Examined by the Chainnan. 
 
 Question. Did you have any interview with Mr. Tucker or Mr. 
 Hall in regard to the method of chartering vessels at Baltimore, or 
 the persons with whom charters were eS'ected 1 
 
 Answer. I have spoken with Mr. Tucker in regard to Mr. Hall 
 being so much employed, or so many vessels being chartered through 
 Mr. Hall, more than once. I do not remember any particular inter- 
 view on this subject. I have told him that I had written to Colonel 
 Belger upon the subject. Mr. Hall I do not remember over to have 
 seen, until 1 saw him one day in this connnittee room, lately, and 
 was told, after he had left the room, that that was Mr. Hall. If I 
 had such an interview it left no impression upon me as to its being 
 of importance. 
 
 Question. Did jMr. Tucker, under the authority of the Secretary 
 of War, have the general subject of the employment of transports 
 under his charge during the year ending January 1, 1868 ? 
 
 Answer. I think that, during Mr. Cameron's administration as 
 
( 15 ) 
 
 Secretary of War, he held a position as superintendent of transpor- 
 tation ; but I have not seen his connnission,. and do not know 
 precisely what his powers were. I think he acted under the 
 instructions of the Secretary of War. When Mr. Stanton took 
 charge of the War Department Mr. Tucker was made Assistant 
 Secretary of War, and acted in connection with transportation from 
 time to time, under instructions from the Secretary of War himself ; 
 what his precise duties and powers were, I am not informed. 
 
 M. C. MEIGS, 
 
 Quartermiister General. 
 
 As the committee identify the testimony and trans- 
 actions of Col. James Belger with Mr. Hall, I must 
 also do so. Col. Belger, hy the record of the com- 
 mittee, was the first witness examined. 
 
 The '2nd Question propounded to him was — How long have you 
 been stationed at Baltimore? 
 
 Answer — / was sent there on the 10th, May, 1861. 
 
 Question — Pid you charter any vessels for Burnside's Expedition ? 
 
 Answer — No, sir; I do not remember that I did. If I did, it Avas 
 by order of Mr. Tucker, the Assistant Secretary of War. I do not 
 recollect now that I did, sir. I may have taken up vessels and 
 chartered them by his direction when it was so stated in the order. 
 
 Question — Did you charter any vessels for the Port Royal or 
 Dupont Expedition ? 
 
 Answer — No, sir. I do not remember that I did, now. 
 
 Now, sir, I submit this evidence conclusively proves 
 and establishes the fact that I neither knew, nor had 
 a transaction with Col. Belger or Mr. Hall, until the 
 latter called on me in response to your advertise- 
 ment of 14th of February 18G2, when I should have 
 been derelict, if not criminal, in the performance of 
 my duty, at a time when every suitable transport 
 was required, if I had not seen Mr. Hall, with other 
 similar bidders and competitors, especially as ■ these 
 transports were required in the immediate vicinity of 
 Baltimore ; and the Government could have well af- 
 forded to have paid even a higher price for them in Bal- 
 timore in preference to the delay and expense in pro- 
 curing transports at distant places. If, then, I had 
 
( 16 ) 
 
 neither seen nor known nor had a transaction with 
 these two gentlemen until the last of February, 1862, 
 which their testimony establishes, and which I 
 solemnly affirm, I will leave it to you and the public 
 to judge of the motive, the fairness and the truthful- 
 ness of the insinuation of the committee, that " the 
 valuable friend of Mr, A. C. Hall, was the late As- 
 sistant Secretary of War, Mr. John Tucker," who 
 secured to liim this monopoly " so singularly exclu- 
 sive," seven months before either of them was ac- 
 quainted with me personally, or communicated with 
 me orally, or in writing. I also aver, to the best of 
 my knowledge, that from the time I parted with Mr. 
 Hall in my office in Philadelphia, I never saw him, 
 except in connection with tlie transports required for 
 some rail road materials and machinery to be shipped 
 from Baltimore for the McClellan Expedition, till the 
 27th of June last, and again once at the Department, 
 and on neither of these two occasions was any busi- 
 ness transacted, proposed, or even referred to. I met 
 Col. Belger for the first time the same day in June, at 
 his office. The next day he accompanied Gen Wool 
 from Baltimore to Washington, and I went in the 
 same car. On my return from Fort Monroe in Sep- 
 tember, on my way to Philadelphia, I called at his 
 office for a few minutes (not exceeding ten). The 
 next time I recollect to have met him was in the 
 room of the Select Committee, to which interview I 
 shall presently refer. I have not seen him since. 
 Thus, to the best of my recollection, I have seen Mr. 
 Hall but four times, and Colonel Belger but three. I 
 concur with the committee that under any ordinary 
 circumstances, " practically it is of no consequence 
 whether Hall and Belger were brought together by 
 
( n ) 
 
 Tucker or not." But when the committee connect 
 and identify the transactions as they do with " gigantic 
 and shameless frauds," I submit, it is of "conse- 
 quence," or at least it is so to me. It is further of 
 great consequence as demonstrating the loose way 
 in which the committee draw their deductions from 
 testimony before them, and the reckless manner in 
 which they make insinuations. 
 
 To recur again to the testimony of Gol. Belger, 
 and to my last interview with him. I called, as be- 
 fore stated, at the room of the committee on Saturday, 
 January 31, 1863, by appointment, to read and sign 
 my testimony. I found Col. Belger in conversation 
 with the Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Grimes. 
 Col. Belger advanced and met me with much frank- 
 ness. I had not seen him for months, and was not 
 aware that he had been before the committee. He 
 at once said substantial Ij?' this : " Mr. Tucker, I have 
 been with this committee before, and on my return 
 to Baltimore it occurred to me that I had uninten- 
 tionally, of course, left an erroneous impression on the 
 minds of the committee relative to our transactions, 
 and I came from Baltimore expressly to correct it." 
 I then, not having the most remote impression that 
 any attack was to be made on me, carelessly replied, 
 "Col. Belger, you must make it right; w^e want the 
 exact facts. That is all." To which he replied, "I 
 will have it all right." I was then requested by Mr. 
 Grimes to retire until his interview with Col. Belger 
 closed. On referring to his testimony on that particu- 
 lar day, I find these words : " I desire to^ppend the 
 " following documents to my testimony. They relate 
 " to, and explain my previous testimony in regard to 
 " the charge made against me of employing sece&- 
 2 
 
( IS ) 
 
 *' sionists, including a letter from General Dix, ex- 
 " pressing his opinion ; also in I'egard to the subject 
 " concerning which you have inquired, of Mr. John 
 " Tucker's directions as to the charterinfir of vessels 
 " from Mr. Hall, preceded by an explanatory note jrom 
 " myself to the chairman of the committee in which I cor- 
 " rect any misapprehension that may arise from my pre- 
 " vious testimony as to Mr. Tucker^ s directions to me." 
 The sentence just quoted (italicized by myself) closes 
 Col. Belger's testimony. The ^' document s^^ referred 
 to immediately follow, but the explanatory note from 
 Col. Belger to the Chairman of tlie Committee, in 
 which he corrects any misapprehension that may arise 
 from his previous testimony as to my directions to 
 him, is entirely omitted. 
 
 I leave it to you to imagine the reason for suppress- 
 ing this explanatory note. I refrain from comment- 
 ing on it. 
 
 This "explanatory note" may have explained that 
 which is otherwise, to me, inexnlicable. Col. Bel<rer 
 and Mr. Hall have both testified they had nothing to 
 do with procuring transports for the Burnside Expe- 
 dition (which sailed January 20, 18G2), or for any one 
 previous, (except on one occasion when Col. Belger 
 assumes the transports for the rail road machinery 
 were for General Burnside, which was an error.) 
 For such transports as I engaged for the Burnside Ex- 
 pedition, and also such as he subsequently chartered 
 at Annapolis, I signed the charter parties as General 
 Transportation Agent. For those secured to move 
 Gen. Mc.CTellan'sarmy, Capt. Hodges, Assistant Quar- 
 termaster, signed the charter parties, with the exception 
 of those required to remove the rail road machinery, 
 &c., to which reference has previously been made. 
 
( 19 ) 
 
 The reason for this exception was tiiis. You well 
 know that on the 10th of April, 1882, I was most 
 unexpectedly called on by you to take important des- 
 patches from the President and yourself to the Head 
 Quarters of General McClellan, near Yorktown. On 
 reaching the steamboat in Baltimore, I remembered 
 to have received tliat mornino; from Mr. Hall a note 
 to the effect that the captains of the schooners and 
 barges laden with the rail road machinery, &c., re- 
 fused to leave until their charter parties were signed. 
 Impressed v/ith the importance that General McClel- 
 lan's forward movements, (the necessity of which was 
 so strongly urged in the despatches of which I was 
 the bearer,) should not be retarded by any neglect of 
 minor details too often overlooked, I, on board the 
 steamboat (using, as it appears, the headed note paper 
 of the Company) addressed to Col. (then Major) Bel- 
 ger, a stranger personally and officially, the following 
 note, for a copy of which I am indebted to the com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Baltimore Steam Packet Company, 
 
 Union Bock, foot of Concord street. 
 
 Baltimore, ^j^ril 10, 1862. 
 Dear Sir : I was suddenly called to leave Washington to go to 
 Fort Monroe. I Icaru that the vessels loaded with engines and cars 
 are ready to move, but the captains require that the charter parties 
 should be first signed. Will you oblige me by doing the needful, 
 as it is very important they should be ready to go on a moment's 
 notice. 
 
 Yours, very respectfully, 
 
 JOHN TUCKER, 
 ..Assistant Secretary of War. 
 Major J. Belger, 
 
 .j'issistant Quartermaster, Baltimore. 
 
 The committee endeavor to involve this hurriedly 
 written note, or the words, "do the needful," in some 
 mystery. I do not discover anything in either be- 
 
( 20 ) 
 
 yoncl the efficient discharge of my duty, and I know 
 nothing more was intended. 
 
 The charters for these transj^orts I did intend CoL 
 Belger to sign. I presumed it was immaterial which 
 Quartermaster signed them. The number engaged 
 for this service the committee state was seventy-two. 
 T may have requested Col. Belger at different times 
 to have executed some dozen other charter parties for 
 special purposes, although I cannot remember that 
 number, and not one of them was taken through Mr. 
 Hall. With the forty-five schooners, thirty barges, 
 and sixteen steamers, the charters of which were 
 signed by Capt. Hodges, and the seventy two charters 
 of schooners and barges signed by Col. Belger, all 
 chartered for the McClellan Expedition, in February 
 and March, 18G2, and confined to those two months 
 all my transactions with Mr. Hall were included and 
 terminated, and all were the result of your advertisement 
 for transporls. 
 
 So, also, with Col. Belger; with the charters of 
 the seventy-two barges and schooners engaged for the 
 transportation of the rail road machinery, &c., char- 
 tered in March, 1862, which charter parties I re- 
 quested him to sign, and the possible dozen other 
 exceptional cases during the year, his duties and acts 
 were separate and distinct from mine. Any discrep- 
 ancy between this statement and that contained in 
 the Report of tlie committee, I must assume to have 
 been explained in Col. Belger's " explanatory note" 
 to the chairman of the committee, with a copy of 
 which neither the public, the Senate, nor myself have 
 been ftivored. 
 
 4/A. I am next introduced in connection with 
 papt. R. F. Lopcr of Philadelphia. I do not propose 
 
( 21 ) 
 
 to make any lengthy review of the comments of the 
 committee with reference to this gentleman, except 
 so far as they attempt to identify his acts with my 
 own. 
 
 The committee state, page 17 : 
 
 The heavier operations of Captain Loper began with the appoint- 
 ment of Mr. Tucker as " United States Transport Agent," and they 
 have continued, without intermission, during the whole of Mr. 
 Tucker's two terms of office, first as agent, and subsequently as 
 Assistant Secretary of War. Mr. Tucker employed Captain Loper 
 to " inspect and recommend" all kinds of vessels at Philadelphia, 
 New York, and Annapolis, for various services and expeditions, and 
 Captain Loper proceeded to charge from five to ten per cent, com- 
 missions on the gross earnings of vessels recommended to Mr. Tucker 
 for charter. Li some cases it was denominated a brokerage com- 
 mission, in others a commission for collecting, and in others still he 
 received five per cent, for brokerage, and five per cent, additional 
 for collecting the sums due to the owners. 
 
 I do not hesitate to assert these remarks are as en- 
 tirely inconsistent with a truthful statement of the 
 facts, as in the case of Mr. Hall. 
 
 Immediately after my appointment in Washington, 
 in April, 18G1, I returned to Philadelphia, and at 
 once discharged such transports as were no longer 
 wanted. Such as were best adapted and required for 
 maintaining tlie line between Perryville and Annapo- 
 lis, formed by J. Edgar Thompson, Esq., President of 
 the Penns^dvania Rail Road Company, S. M. Felton, 
 Esq., President of the Philadelphia, Wilmington and 
 Baltimore Rail Road Company, and Captain R. F. 
 Loper, acting as their assistant, were retained, 
 
 Of these there were a number belonging to trans- 
 portation companies in which Captain Loper was inter- 
 ested. In every case the rate of pay w^as reduced. 
 Many of these steamers were retained in service by 
 different Quartermasters after the direct communication 
 with Washington by rail road was opened, as they 
 
( 22 ) 
 
 were peculiarly well adapted to the transportation of 
 stores and munitions of war from New York and 
 Philadelphia to Baltimore and Washington. They 
 were expressly built for these routes. I regret that I 
 have not statements before me which would show the 
 exact relative price paid for these steamers, and any 
 and all other charters made by any other officers of 
 the Government. The Quartermaster General, in 
 giving his instructions to Captain Hodges in reference 
 to the McClellan Expedition, states : — 
 
 " For })ropellers and light draught steamers it is 
 not possible to fix a rate. The offers received under 
 the advertisement of the War Department, vary from 
 fifty cents to one dollar per ton per day." Those of 
 Captain Loper's, to ivliich reference is here made, are at 
 41 i cents per ton per day. In addition to being 
 so peculiarly suitable for the purpose, I believe them 
 to be the cheapest steam transports known to the 
 Department. 
 
 The committee state, " ' the heavier operations' of 
 "Capt.Loper began with the appointment of Mr. Tucker 
 "as United States Transportation Agent, and they 
 "have continued without intermission during the whole 
 "of Mr. Tucker's two terms of office, first as Agent, 
 " and subsequently as Assistant Secretary of War." I 
 will again test this statement by the facts never before 
 so useful to me as now, in answering this report. By 
 reference to " Senate Executive Document No. 37 — • 
 37th Congress, 2d Session," which was before the 
 Committee, as they quote it, it appears that with the 
 exception of renewing at reduced prices the charters 
 of the propellers before referred to, I chartered from 
 the time of my appointment as Transportation Agent, 
 on the 28th April, 1862, to October 1st, 1862, but one 
 
( 23 ) 
 
 bark (to take ice to Fort Pickens, an unusual service) 
 and eleven propellers. These were all on special 
 requisitions. The " heavier operations" began with 
 General Burnside's Expedition. He commenced pre- 
 paring for this movement about the 1st of October, 
 18G1. After he had been engaged about two months 
 in procuring transports, I was directed to assist him 
 in obtaining any he might still require, and to expe- 
 dite his departure as much as possible. 
 
 This duty required the purchase of a few steam- 
 ers, as well as the charter of others, and also sailing 
 vessels. At my first interview with General Burn- 
 side he informed me ho had negotiations for the 
 purchase of a steamer and a bark, which he wished to 
 buy. He named the prices demanded, and the rates 
 at which he supposed they could be purchased. He 
 introduced me to the parties who offered them for sale. 
 I replied I would have them properly inspected and 
 would then again see the sellers. Before this in- 
 spection was perfected I happened to meet Captain 
 Loper, who has built more steamers than any other 
 man in this country. I inquired if he knew the steamer. 
 He replied he built her and knew all about her. I then 
 took Captain Loper to General Burnside to furnish the 
 exact description, draft of water, &c., &c. 
 
 Captain Leper's valuation of the steamer was 
 $12,500 less than the lowest price that had been 
 named. He remarked he knew the owners perfectly 
 well, and if it was desired, he was confident he could 
 purchase the steamer at the price he had stated. 
 
 With General Burnside's approval the purchase was 
 thus made. This introduction to General Burnside, 
 and this result, naturally inspired confidence in Capt. 
 Loper. 
 
( 24 ) 
 
 General Buniside's requisitions were peculiar and 
 intricate. He required sea-going steamers, while he, 
 of necessity, limited the draft of water to 82^ feet. He 
 also desired steamboats to accompany his expedition, 
 to navigate the bays and streams emptying into Hat- 
 teras Inlet, drawing less than two feet of water. It 
 was difficult to meet these requisitions. I may prop- 
 erly inquire if such were met in other cases ? They 
 were in the case under consideration, and I sug- 
 gest that much of General Burnside's success in North 
 Carolina may be attributed to this efficiency in what 
 may be regarded as minor details never to be neg- 
 lected by a practical man in any capacity. 
 
 To successfully meet these demands, I availed my- 
 self of the great practical knowledge and experience 
 of Captain Loper, who, from personal observation as 
 a mariner, was perfectly familiar with every inlet on 
 the coast, and practically experienced with every de- 
 scription of water transports from his early youth. 
 How the duties were performed will be best stated 
 in the following correspondence. General Burnside 
 left New York in December with the transports he 
 then deemed requisite. On his arrival at Annapolis, 
 the place of rendezvous., he called on me for more. 
 He also requested me to send Captain Loper to An- 
 napolis to aid him. 
 
 The Committee again furnish me with this docu- 
 mentary evidence. 
 
 COPY. 
 
 Philadelphia, December 26, 1861. 
 Dear Sir : — I am requested by General A. E. Burnside (by tele- 
 graph,) to ask you to go at once to Annapolis. You will oblige me 
 by doing so and by aiding him iu any way he may desire. 
 
 Yours, very respectfully, 
 
 John Tucker. 
 To Capt. R. F. Loper. 
 
( 25 ) 
 
 Success is the standard by which tlie world judges. 
 In this instance, it appears in the following commu- 
 nication : 
 
 Annapolis, January 7, 1862. 
 Dear Sir : I beg leave to express to you my hearty appreciation 
 of the services rendered me in the fitting out of the expedition under 
 my coiumaud by Captain 1\. F. Loper. The interest and zeal mani- 
 fested by this gentleman in this work has been constant and un- 
 tiring, and he has in every instance fully answered every demand 
 made upon his skill and his patience. I most cheerfully acknow- 
 ledge my obligations to him, and take great pleasure in recommend- 
 ing him as a competent and efficient man, whose efficiency and mature 
 judgment cannot fail to be of great service in any case of emergency. 
 Yours, very truly, 
 
 A. E. BuRNSiDE, Brigadier General. 
 Hon. Simon Cameron, 
 
 Secretary of IVar, Washington. 
 
 The committee next remark : " Mr. Tucker em- 
 " ployed Captain Loper to ' insjDCct and recommend' 
 " all kinds of vessels at Philadelphia, New York and 
 " Annapolis, for various services and expeditions, and 
 " Captain Loper proceeded to charge from five to ten 
 '- per cent, commissions on the gross earnings of ves- 
 " sels recommended to Mr. Tucker for charter." 
 
 This refers to the transports for the McCIellan 
 Expedition. After my experience of Captain Lo- 
 per's practical knowledge in the Burnside move- 
 ment, and General Barnside's voluntary expression of 
 opinion to the Secretary of War, "recommending 
 him as a competent and efficient man, whose efficiency 
 and mature judgment cannot fail to be of great service 
 in any case of emergency," I did not hesitate to avail 
 of such qualifications, when emphatically, time was 
 money. I conferred with Captain Hodges, then sent 
 for Captain LojDer and informed him of our desire to 
 avail of his services as an expert to inspect transports, 
 that the Government would not pay^him, and I wished 
 
( 2G ) 
 
 first to have it clearly and distinctly understood that 
 he should not receive anything in any form or man- 
 ner from the owners or their a2:onts. In short, there 
 should be one exclusive and controlling motive, and 
 that, the interest of the Government. 
 
 To this he readily assented. I then believed and 
 now believe he was governed solely by this principle 
 while he thus acted. I will again apply to the testi- 
 mony to substantiate this statement. The first is from 
 my evidence before the committee. 
 
 Question. Captain Loper was not receiving any compensation from 
 the Governinent ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. Did you know the amount he charged the owners of 
 these vessels % 
 
 Answer. He iold nie at the time that he shoukl not charge them 
 a cent, and has told me so over and over again since. In regard to 
 that McClellan Expedition, he has never received a cent, directly or 
 indirectly, from the owners ; that was a condition that 1 made. 
 
 Question. Have you chartered any vessels through him since ? 
 
 Answer. I have chartered vessels of him. 
 
 Question. Any through him, upon his recommendation % 
 
 Answer. I may, upon his recounnendation.* 
 
 Question. Did you know what per cent, he charged for recom- 
 mending them to you ? 
 
 Answer. I did not. 
 
 The next is from that of Captain Hodges : 
 
 (P. 224.) — Question. Do you know of Captain Loper's receiving 
 a commission from Thomas Clyde. 
 
 Answer. No, sir. I do not know of Captain Loper receiving a 
 commission from anybody in the world. 
 
 (P. 230.) — Question. Do you know what consideration Captain 
 Loper received % 
 
 Answer. I do not. I did not know that he received any at all. 
 
 Question. What did he represent in regard to his services ? 
 
 Answer. As far as he was connected with us — Mr. Tucker and 
 myself — he said he got nothing for it; that he was willing to give his 
 
 * It is here proper to state that after mature reflection, and an examina- 
 tion of the tables furnished by the committee, I do not remember to have 
 chartered any vessel from Captain Loper, or on his recommendation after 
 the sailing of the McClellan Expedition, for which fleet only four steamers 
 at an average of less than $125 per day were taken of him. 
 
( 27 ) 
 
 services. If he could be of any use to the governiuent, he was will- 
 ing to do so. Mr. Tucker told him he was to get no pay ; but 
 wanted his services. Captain Loper willingly agreed to this. 
 
 Here follows Captain Loper's statement on this 
 point: 
 
 Question. Mr. Tucker came on to where? 
 
 Answer. To Philadelphia. He told me that he and Mr. Hodges 
 were appointed by the Secretary of War to get up the vessels for 
 this expedition ; but he told me tliat he was not authorized to pay 
 me anything for my services, and I must chai-ge no commission nor 
 anything else for my services : I then told him that I would volun- 
 teer my services, and that I would charge the government nothing 
 for my time. I examined all the vessels which I could find in New 
 York and all we could get in Philadelphia; every steamboat that 
 was fit, that could be taken, was taken. Mr. Flanagan, Mr. Groves 
 of the Ericsson line. Captain Whilldin, and Mr. Clyde of the Ex- 
 press line, whom I had been doing business for, I told them each, 
 and every one of them, that I could not take a commission in any 
 form or manner, nor I never did take one penny for all the vessels 
 examined for the expedition. We got all that we could get in New 
 York. Since this war begun, I have been offered by almost all the 
 ship-brokers in New York to divide the commission with me on ves- 
 sels, which offer I never have accepted ; not one dollar, either di- 
 rectly or indirectly. 
 
 (P. 267.) — Question. What proportion do you suppose your per- 
 centage as brokerage would bear to the aggregate amount that you 
 have received for advancing and collecting money ? 
 
 Answer. I never received anything in any other way than for ad- 
 vancing and collecting — not a dollar ; I never have cliarged any- 
 thing for interest in any case except that of Captain Whilldin. 
 
 Question. You have charged for advancing and collecting? 
 
 Answer. I have charged for advancing and collecting five per 
 cent — only five per cent. 
 
 Question. In some instances have you not charged more ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir ; not one, with the exception of Captain Whill- 
 din ; I did not charge that ; he gave it to me ; that arrangement with 
 Captain Whilldin was two or three months after the vessels were 
 chartered. 
 
 Question. In no other instance than Captain Whilldin's ? 
 
 Answer. Not that I remember of. 
 
 Question. If you had done it, would you have remembered it? 
 
 Answer. I think I should, sir. 
 
 Question. In addition to the commission, do you not get about five 
 per cent, for advancing and collecting? 
 
 Answer. No, sir ; the five per cent, includes everything, except 
 in the case of Captain Whilldin ; I did not charge one cent for ad- 
 vancing or interest. For 3Ir. Williams, of the steamer Patapsco, I 
 advanced $75,000 for three months. 
 
( 28 ) 
 
 Question. You have received five per cent, from Mr. Reybold 1 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 Question. And Captain Whilldin ? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 Question. And Mr. Groves '? 
 
 Answer. I have received five per cent from Mr. Whilldin, Mr. 
 Flanagan, Mr. lleybold, Mr. Groves, and from Mr. Clyde, for part 
 of his vessels. I gave up his charters last July. 
 
 The trcaiisports here referred to were not for the 
 McClellan Expedition. 
 
 I respectfully submit that this evidence establishes 
 the fact that on the transports I requested Capt. Loper 
 to "inspect and recommend," he did not proceed to 
 charge five and ten per cent, commissions, or any 
 commissions whatever. 
 
 It is proper to state, that none of the vessels in- 
 spected or recommended by Captain Loper, or any 
 others chartered by me, met with any accident while 
 in the service for which they were chartered. I did 
 not procure, or charter, or have anything to do with 
 engaging any of the transports for the Banks' Expe- 
 dition. 
 
 The next point to which allusion is made by the 
 committee is the charter of the steamers Champion 
 and Louisiana. I do not remember about the former. 
 She was not chartered by me. With reference to the 
 latter, " the committee regret that their time has not 
 permitted an investigation into the facts connected with 
 the charter of the Louisiana, which was taken into the 
 Government service on the 8th January, 1862; at the 
 enormous rate of $800 per day, and is still in the ser- 
 vice. Col. Belger testifies that she was chartered by 
 Tucker, and that he, Belger, has paid by order of the 
 Quartermaster General, at different times $200,410.23 
 for her services for 251 days. But she has been in the 
 service over a year, and there must be still a sum due 
 
( 29 ) 
 
 her greater than her entire value." I was not ques= 
 tioned by the committee with reference to this char- 
 ter, but will now give the facts connected with it. The 
 committee state Captain Loper has sworn " she was 
 chartered by Mr. Brandt directl};^ to Gen'l Burnside 
 without being examined by himself." The commit- 
 tee have before stated she was chartered on the 8th 
 of January, 1862 This was the exact tiuio when 
 General Burnside was chartering vessels at Annapolis. 
 He was in an emergency for transports. The Gov- 
 ernment were impatient at the delay in the sailing of 
 his expedition. The daily expense by the detention 
 was enormous. 
 
 General Burnside was most anxious to get away. 
 He had found the transports, which he supposed suffi- 
 cient when he left New York, inadecpate on his ar- 
 rival at Annapolis. He required more. The "Lou- 
 isiana" was a most capacious and costly steam trans- 
 port. He wanted her for a short time only. He 
 could not tell the owners the voyage required to be 
 performed, as his destination was a secret. Hence in- 
 surance was not to be obtained. The owners knew 
 their steamer was not adapted to a long sea voyage, 
 or very rough weather. Therefore the high price ac- 
 ceded to by General Burnside, and reluctantly accepted 
 (as I am informed) by the owners. I knew nothing 
 of the transaction at the time, but at the request of 
 General Burnside signed the charter parties, as I did 
 all the others he made at Annapolis. I learned the 
 fiicts, however, a short time afterwards, when the 
 owners informed me their fine steamer had been se- 
 riously damaged by being ashore in Hatteras Inlet, 
 and they supposed they had an equitable claim for the 
 damages. These were not allowed. The committee 
 
( 30 ) 
 
 err in stating the " Louisiana lias been over a year 
 and is still in the service, and there must still be a sum 
 due her greater than her entire value." 
 
 Colonel Belger states in his testimony, the "Louis- 
 iana" vv'as discharged on the 15th of September, 1862, 
 and paid in full. He adds he employed her four days 
 from 4th of December, 1862, to 8th December, 1862, 
 at $600 per day.* 
 
 The next reference to myself is in connection with 
 Mr. James B. Danforth, of New York, and the steamer 
 "Metamora." I have known Mr. Danforth for many 
 years. Before I reached the city of New York, the 
 telegraph had communicated to the country the demand 
 of the Government for transports. Mr. Danforth, 
 shortly after my arrival, introduced different persons 
 (strangers to me) who made offers of transports, which 
 after examination and negotiation, and a reduction of 
 price in most cases, were accepted. These transports 
 were among the very best that were procured, and 
 fully performed all that was represented of them. I 
 perfected these charters in every instance vv'ith the 
 owners, not knowing or having the most remote idea 
 that Mr. Danforth had an interest of any description 
 in them. The first intimation reached nie in the 
 month of August following, when I was informed of 
 it by one of the owners. I had no manner of interest, 
 direct or indirect, in these steamers or charters, or in 
 any interest Mr. Danforth may have had in them. I 
 much regret Mr Danforth was not examined by the 
 Committee.! 
 
 * The " Lou'iHiana" was dischargeu from the department of Gen. Burn- 
 side in March, 18(52. 
 
 •j- I learu that he waited on Ihem at their hotel, in New York, and inti- 
 mated hia readiness to be examined. 
 
( 31 ) 
 
 With reference to the steamer Metamora, the Com- 
 mittee state : 
 
 Another extraordlnar}^ condition of facts is developed in connec- 
 tion with this steamer. She was an old vessel, and cost her owners 
 $"25,000. She was chartered hy Assistant Secretary of U'ar, John 
 Tucker, though the latter gentleman has failed, for some unexplained 
 reason, to include her name in the list he furnished to the couunittee, 
 of vessels chartered by him or under his direction. The price paid for 
 her by the government, was $450 per day. According to the testimony 
 of Mr. Lewis Baker, one of lier owners, " she was chartered to be deliv- 
 ered at Annapolis on the Gth of IMarch, 18G2. I state from memory. 
 A telegram came on here from one of the owners m New York to de- 
 liver her there on the Gth of March, with 4,000 gallons of water on 
 board. We got ready to run the blockade, and were stopped here on 
 the night of the 4th by the Quartermaster's Department at 4 or 5 
 o'cloclc in the afternoon. That is the time she was chartered." * * 
 
 Question. When did your pay for the Metamora actually com- 
 mence ? 
 
 Answer. We got paid from the first of the month. 
 
 Question. Why were you paid for that sis days prior? 
 
 Answer. That is more than I can state ; we v/ere paid for her. * * 
 
 Question. Do you know of her having made a pleasure Excur- 
 sion 1 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir; we made an excursion on the 1st or the 2d 
 of March down to a Rebel battery opposite Mattawomau Creek, called 
 Cockpit- Point ]Jattcry. 
 
 Question. AV'as that on private account ? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir ; it was our own boat ;. we knew nothing about 
 Government then ; that was on the 1st and 2d of March. * * 
 
 Question. Those were tM'o of the days for which you were paid 
 by the Government ? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir ; we were paid from the first of the month. 
 
 Tlie evidence shows that the Metamora was not only paid for at 
 least four days' services that she did not render, amounting to $1800, 
 but she was repaired at the expense of the Government to the amount 
 of $1447.02, and that during the time she was undergoing repairs, said 
 by Daker to be fourteen days, she received her charter party pay $451 
 per day. A part of these repairs consisted of bunkers in which the 
 private trading stores of some of her owners, who were army sutlers, 
 were carried ; for it is shown that this vessel was used for private 
 purposes, and that some of the owners realized upon one trip of the 
 vessel to Harrison's Landing the handsome profit of $3,100. D. is 
 stated by one of the owners, Mr. John Packer, and also by Mr. John 
 Tucker, who directed this large amount of repairs to be done to 
 the Metamora (see his letter to Col. Belger,) that they were paid by 
 the Government in consequence of damage done to her by the per- 
 formance of extra-hazardous work in the early part of May, 1862, 
 when she was required to cross in boisterous weather from Fortress 
 
( 32 ) 
 
 Monroe to Clienystone Inlet. By reference to Mnjor Bolgcr's ac- 
 count of repairs done to her, it will be observed that the items are : 
 May 29. Repairing Awnings, &c. - - . - |32 35 
 May 30. Joiners' \York, &c., and materials. - - 361 10 
 
 May 31. Painting, &c., and materials. - - ~ 281 82 
 May 31. Pattern^Makers' work, &c. - - - 1,148 04 
 
 Aug 27. Carpenters' work, &c. - . . _ 2,623 41 
 
 It would be curious to know how the straining of this steamer 
 in heavy weather rendered necessary the application of $281 82 of 
 paint, or $1,148 04 of pattern-makers' work ; nor is it easy to un- 
 derstand the connection between the strain to which she was exposed 
 in May and the $2,623 41 of carpenters' work expended upon her 
 in August. 
 
 The above extract is the statement which originally 
 appeared in the New York Tribune. The following 
 is taken from the official report : 
 
 It would be curious to know how the straining of this steamer in 
 heavy weather rendered necessary the application of $281 82 of 
 paint, or $1,148 04 of pattern-makers' work. By reference to Col. 
 Belger's report of vessels repaired at Baltimore under his direction, 
 (p. 304,) it may be fairly inferred that the dates were intended to 
 designate the times when the repairs were actually made, and not to 
 the times when the money Avas paid for them, because there are many 
 entries of repairs marked " not paid ;" and these, like the others, 
 are all provided with dates. The committee, curious to learn what 
 connection existed between the strain received by the Metamora in 
 May and the $2,623 41 of carpenters' work put upon her in August, 
 addressed a letter to the Assistant Secretary of AVar, of which the 
 following is a copy : 
 
 Select Committee Room, United States Senate, 
 
 Washington, FeWunry 6, 1863. 
 
 Dear Sir : It appears from the list of vessels repaired at Balti- 
 more, Maryland, under the direction of Colonel James Belger, quar- 
 termaster, which list was transmitted to me, for the use of the select 
 committee of the Senate on the chartering of transports for the 
 Banks expedition, &c., by the honorable Secretary of War, that the 
 steamer Metamora received the following repairs : 
 
 1862, May 29. Repairing awnings, &c. 
 1862, May 30. Joiners' work, &c. - - - 
 1862, May 31. Painting, &c. _ - . 
 
 1862, May 31. Pattern-makers' work, &c. - 
 1862, Aug. 27. Carpenters' work, &C. 
 
 $32 
 
 35 
 
 361 
 
 90 
 
 281 
 
 82 
 
 1,148 
 
 04 
 
 2,623 
 
 41 
 
 1^4,447 
 
 52 
 
( ^-» ) 
 
 The committee desire to ascertain -wbetlier the last-mentioDed sum 
 of $2,623.41 was paid for work done on or about the 27th of 
 August, or for work done on or about May 30, when the previous 
 repairs were made on said steamer, there being nothing in Colonel 
 Belger's report to show, with certainty, whether the dates refer to 
 the time when the repairs were done and completed, or to the time 
 when the money was paid for the same. Will you please inform the 
 conuiiittee whether there is any record in the AVar Department to 
 
 elucidate this point '? 
 
 * * * * * * * ■* * * 
 
 Very repcctfullv, your obedient servant, 
 
 ■ JAMES W. GllIMES, Chairman, S>-c. 
 Hon. P. II. Watson, Jlssistant Secretary of War. 
 
 On the 9th inst. the Assistant Secretary of War, by direction of 
 the Secretary, transmitted to the Committee the follov.-ing letter from 
 (^ol. Belger : — 
 
 Quartermaster's Office, 
 
 Baltimore, February 7, 1863. 
 Sir : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter 
 dated February 6, 1863, enclosing a copy of a portion of a letter 
 from Senator Grimes, relative to the repairs made upon the steamer 
 " Metamora," and, in reply, to state that the date, August 27, 
 1862, which was placed opposite the amount for carpenters' work, 
 &c., $2,623.41, on this steamer, was the date of the payment of the 
 account. The proper date should be May 31, 1862. 
 
 Enclosed I hand you the order for the repairs of said steamer, 
 received from the Hon. John Tucker, then Assistant Secretary of 
 War. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 JAS. BELGEK, 
 Colonel and Qi/a?termaster. 
 Hon. E. M. Stanton, 
 
 Secretary of War, Washington, D. C. 
 
 [Enclosure.] 
 Assistant Quartermaster's Office, 
 Department of Virginia, Fort Monroe, May 16, 1862. 
 Dear Sir : The steamer " Metamora" was called upon to perform 
 some extra hazardous service, in doing which she sprung her guards 
 !iud otherwise strained herself. She will be sent to Baltimore in 
 \ day or two, for some repairs of her hull, rendered necessary by 
 this service. It is the opinion of all the officers here who know the 
 sircumstances (in wliich I concur) that the cost of these repairs 
 should be borne by the government. 
 
 You will please have her repaired as soon as possible, and returned 
 liei'e, as she is most useful. 
 
 Yours respectfully, JOHN TUCKEK, 
 
 Jlssistanl Secretary of War. 
 Major J. Belger, 
 
 Assistant Quartermaster , Baltimore. 
 
 3 
 
( 34 ) 
 
 " It thus appears, that the August exponditure of ^2,623.41 was 
 " really a part of the repairs of May 21*, 30 and 31, when, as Mr. 
 " Tucker alleges, she ' sprung her guards and otherwise strained her- 
 " self.' The couunittee leave to Col. Belger the task of explaining 
 " the discrepancy between his two reports." 
 
 A portion of that which the committee did, not un- 
 derstand, (the carpenters' work done in May, but not 
 paid till Augustj as explained by Col. Belger, does not 
 seem to be entirely satisfactory to the committee. I 
 will endeavor to make my explanations more so, al- 
 though I had supposed my own testimony on this sub- 
 ject, which will be found in their report, pages 343 
 to 345, was sufliciently full and explicit, and to which 
 I ask reference. 
 
 The exact facts with reference to the " Metamora'' 
 are these : The owners called at Caj^t. Hodges' office 
 soon after our arrival in New York, and offered to 
 charter this steamer. They stated she had just run 
 the blockade of the Potomac, and was then in Wash- 
 ington, where she had thus been sent to find employ- 
 ment. The steamer was well known. She was 
 chartered with others of the same owners, pro- 
 vided she was at Annapolis on the 6th of March, 
 18G2, the time when the others, after being coaled, 
 obtaining supplies of water for the troops, &c., &c., 
 were expected to reach that place. There was mani- 
 fest propriety in making that condition, as she might 
 not again Ije so successfid in running the blockade. 
 Of course she was then regularly entered on Captain 
 Hodges' list. The proper order was given l)y the 
 owners. The Quartermaster in Washington would 
 not permit her to leave. (See the evidence). The 
 owners promptly advised this result. Capt. Hodges 
 then erased the Metamora from his list of charters. 
 A few days afterwards Capt. Hodges sent me a state- 
 
( 35 ) 
 
 ment of the transports secured. Of course the Meta- 
 iiiora was not on it. A copy of this list, prepared by 
 Capt. Hodges, (see my tastiniony) was handed to the 
 coinmittee. It did not. of course, inchide the Meta- 
 mora. You will remember that about the time Com- 
 modore Vanderbilt was presenting to the Government 
 his steamship Vanderbilt to destroy the " Merrimac" 
 (may I here say, resulting from my suggestions to 
 3^ou) I was called on by you for the fastest steamer 
 at command, to send Mr, Vanderbilt to Fort Monroe. 
 In his presenc3 I named the Metamora, then in the 
 service of the Quartermaster's Department. His com- 
 ments about her speed and other good qualities caused 
 you to order that when she had performed the duty 
 then re:[uired she should be put on the Telegraph line 
 between F()rt Monroe and the wires at Cherrystone. 
 On her being thus employed, and on application of 
 the owners, I sojn after requested Capt. Hodges to 
 execute a charter party at the price originally aL,^reed 
 upon. This is a fuller answer, made on reflection and 
 investigation, than that made during my examination 
 to the question put ])y the Chairman of the Commit- 
 tee, which I think could have been more appropriately 
 addressed to Capt. Hodges, who had charge of the re- 
 cords, minute details, and payments. 
 
 At this point, I beg to put the words of the report 
 on this subject by the side of my answer. The 
 Committee observe : — 
 
( 36 ) 
 
 " She was chartered by As- 
 sistant Secretary of AVur John 
 Tucker, although this gentleman 
 has failed, for some unexplained 
 reason, to include her name in 
 the list he furnished to the 
 committee of vessels chartered by 
 him or under his direction.''^ 
 
 Question. If you chartered 
 the Metamora, how happens it 
 that she is not entered on your 
 list that you have furnished to 
 the committee? 
 
 Answer. I think you will find 
 on Captain Hodges's original 
 papers, chartering vessels, that 
 the Metamora was chartered and 
 entered regularly on his list, and 
 that a day or two afterwards the 
 owner came to me and said that 
 Major Van Vliet, or the quarter- 
 master here, (Washington) could 
 not release her, and that her 
 name was, therefore, struck otF 
 our list ; and subsequently Com- 
 modore Vanderbilt came here, 
 just at the time he was giving 
 the steamer Vanderbilt to the 
 government, and some fast steam- 
 er was wanted to take him down 
 to Fort Monroe, and the Meta- 
 mora was assigned to that duty. 
 It is possible that that was the 
 first time I had anything to do 
 with her, and that might have 
 been the cause of the delay in 
 signing the charter. 
 
 The Chairman of the Committee frequently inter- 
 rupts a witness, puts his questions rapidly, expects 
 immediate answers, is impatient at delay, and. averse 
 to explanations. 
 
 I supposed, however, the answer on this point was 
 sufficiently satisfactory, as he immediately changed 
 the subject (his practice) by putting the following 
 
 Question. Do you know anything about the steamer 
 Highland Liglit ? 
 
 If the explanation in my testimony why the Meta- 
 mora was not on the list sent to me by Capt. Hodges, 
 and the copy furnished to the committee led the lat- 
 ter to use the words that it was " for some unex- 
 plained reason," the foregoing additional statements 
 
( 37 ) 
 
 will satisfy you there was no mysterious or designed 
 jbjed in it. Equally clear will appear the further re- 
 ferences and exj^lanations of the repairs, &c., to this 
 steamer by the following statement : 
 
 While the Metamora was employed in the telegraph 
 line, and at the time Norfolk was captured, the Presi- 
 ient, the Secretary of the Treasury, and j^ourself were 
 at Fort Monroe. On the morning the Merrimac was 
 iestroyed you went to Norfolk, intending to go from 
 thence direct to Washington. On your return you 
 stopped opposite the Fort. I boarded your steamer, 
 and was told you had sent an important despatch to 
 the telegraph office, to go to Cherrystone. I remained 
 till your messenger returned with the answer that it 
 was blowing so hard, and was so rough outside, no 
 steamer drawing four and a half feet water (the limit 
 at Cherrystone) could live in the sea then running. 
 You said the message was of great importance, and 
 must go. I went immediately to the captain of the 
 Metamora, and asked him to take it. He stated 
 his fears that no steamer with the limited draught of 
 water could live in the sea then running outside. I 
 replied, the emergency was great, and if he could not 
 go, I must find one that would. He answered there 
 was no steamer better adapted for the service than the 
 Metamora. He conferred with some of the officers of 
 the boat, and then informed me that he and the crew 
 would readily incur any risk, but he did not think the 
 owners of the steamer would justify him in assuming 
 such an extra hazardous risk ; but if the Government 
 would pay any damage the vessel sustained he would 
 go. To this I agreed. The message was duly de- 
 livered. When the gale abated the Metamora re- 
 turned with her guards badly sprung, and some other 
 
( 38 ) 
 
 damage had been sustained. The steamer was ex- 
 amined. I then, in pursuance of my agreement, wrote 
 the letter (copy ah'eady furnished) relative to the re- 
 pairs " of her hull,'" and added, " It is the opinion of all 
 the officers here wlio know the circumstances (in which 
 I concur) that the cost of these repairs should be 
 borne by the Government." If any unnecessary ex- 
 pense was incurred for "painting," "pattern makers' 
 work," &c., it was not by my orders, and I am not 
 responsible. Afterwards application was made for 
 pay during the time the steamer was undergoing 
 these repairs. I conferred with the Quartermaster 
 General on the subject. That gentlemen agreed with 
 me that it would have been manifestly unjust to sub- 
 ject the owners to a loss occasioned by an extra hazar- 
 dous risk, assumed expressly at the urgent request of 
 the officers of the Government, and under a promise 
 of indemnification. It was paid. 
 
 Here is Capt. Hodges' testimony on the subject : 
 
 Washington, Frida_y, January 30, 1863. 
 Captain Henry C. Hodges recalled, testified further, as follows : 
 You asked me, when I was before this connnittee, in reference to 
 the steamer Metamora being repaired at Baltimore. Capt. Acker 
 pi'esented me a certificate from Captain Tallmadge, Assistant Quar- 
 termaster of the army at Fort Monroe, of services by this boat. In 
 this certificate Captain Tallmadge recommended that certain days, 
 during which the boat had been undergoing repairs, should not be 
 deducted from the pay of the boat, on account of service she had 
 performed — extra service. I told Captain Acker it would be im- 
 possible for me to do so ; I had no authority for so doing. He then 
 requested me to write to the Assistant Secretary of War, Mr. 
 Tucker. I did so. I think I wrote two letters in reference to it. 
 At last I got a reply from the Assistant Secretary of War, who said 
 that he had consulted with the Quartermaster General and presented 
 the facts to him, and that the Quartermaster General concurred witlu 
 him (the Assistant Secretary of War) as to the propriety of paying 
 for this boat, and directed me to pay for the tinie durmg which she 
 underwent repairs, which I did. Henry C. Hodges, 
 
 Lieutennnt Colonel and Quartermusler, United States Army. 
 
( 39 ) 
 
 Tims I have explained why the charter was dated 
 April 20, instead of March 1, 1862 ; the occasion 
 which rendered repairs necessary, and that before or- 
 dering them to be made, I conferred with all the offi- 
 cers of the Government who knew the circumstance.s, 
 and had their approval, and also with the Quartermas- 
 ter General, before directing the owners to be paid 
 while the repairs were being made. 
 
 But one thing remains to be explained, and that the 
 allusion to the occasional use of the steamer by suttlers. 
 I can only remark, if the committee supposed it was 
 my duty to look to this, they mistook my duties. 
 
 If with this truthful statement, which is substan- 
 tially in the evidence, any " extraordinary condition 
 of facts" is develojDed in connection with this steamer, 
 so fiir as I am concerned, I am not aware of it.* 
 
 I will not close this review of the Report of the Com- 
 mittee, and such of the testimony to which they refer, 
 without alhiding to some of the evidence before them, 
 which they do not notice, but which I regard quite as 
 important as much of that on which they so much en- 
 large, for forming a correct judgment or "conclusion" 
 as to the motives, integrity and efficienc}' of an officer 
 of the Government. 
 
 The committee do not refer to the evidence of 
 Mr. S. S. Bishop, one of the gentlemen who was 
 brought as prominently before them by ray answer 
 to their first interrogatory as was Captain Loper. 
 Mr. Bishop testified as follows : — 
 
 Question. How many vessels have you chartered to the govern- 
 ment ? 
 
 Answer. I could not answer that question now. 
 
 * The Committee state, " that the Metamora was not oulj' paid for at 
 Innst four days' service she did not render, amountinoj to $18110," &c. I am 
 iiiforined by the captain that this is totally incorrect. 
 
( 40 ) 
 
 Question. To whom did you charter them? 
 
 Answer. I chartered to Mr. Tucker, when he was transpor- 
 tation agent, and to Captain Hodges, the quartermaster. 
 Question. Where was Captain Hodges quartermaster? 
 Answer. He was located at that time at New York, but was 
 taking up vessels for the McGleUan Expedition at this place. 
 Question. Who is Captain Hodges ? 
 
 Answer. I understand him to be assistant quartermaster of the 
 United States army. 
 
 Question. To whom else did you charter ? 
 
 Answer. To Captain Boyd, assistant quartermaster of the United 
 States army located here (Philadelphia). 
 
 Question. When did you make your last charters 1 
 Answer. The last charter was made for a special purpose, 
 yesterday. 
 
 Question. For what purpose ? 
 
 Answer. For the transportation of coal from here to Washington 
 and Alexandria. 
 
 Question. Who authorized you to make that? 
 Answer. Captain A. Boyd. 
 
 Question. State, if you please, the names of some of the vessels 
 you have thus chartered. 
 Witness. Recently ? 
 
 The Chairman. At any time — steamers and sailing vessels. 
 Answer. The steamer Beverly, a propeller ; the steamer New 
 York : the steamer Ironsides ; the steamer Vim ; the steamer 
 Bristol ; the steamer Anna Liza : the steamer Concord ; the steamer 
 Black Diamond. 
 
 Question. Are those all the steamers that you have chartered up 
 to this time? 
 
 Answer. That embraces about all up to this time. 
 Question. Since the war began ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir, recently ; those are merely chartered for 
 carrying coal and towing barges to Alexandria and Washington, 
 under a ten days' charter. 
 
 Question. Have you chartered any sailing vessels recently ? 
 Answer. None recently, sir. 
 
 Question. What steamers have you chartered previous to those 
 you have just named ? 
 
 Answer. I could not give you that information unless you would 
 allow me time to answer it from my office. 
 
 Question. Is Captain Boyd stationed here now ? 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 Question. Where you have chartered a vessel by the ton per 
 month, what was the price ? 
 
 Answer. The last was four dollars per registered ton per 
 month. 
 
 Question. When was that charter made ! 
 
 Answer. The charters made under Captain Hodges, or through 
 him, were three dollars and a quarter per month. 
 
( « ) 
 
 Question. Those vessels you have chartered, I understand belong 
 to other persons. 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 Question. What was the rate of percentage you charged for 
 securing the charter ? 
 
 Answer. The great bulk of these sailing vessels are owned in 
 New Jersey. They are built there in shares of one-sixth, one- 
 eighth, &c., and I charge five per cent, for securing the charter or 
 freight, and for collecting it. 
 
 Question. How much did you charge on the steamers ? 
 
 Answer. The same rates for the sailing vessels and steamers. 
 
 Question. Have you had any difficulty in securing the payment of 
 your charter parties 1 
 
 Answer. Only in waiting for the funds. 
 
 Question. Have you ever had any of them discounted "? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. Wiio are the principals for whom you have acted in 
 effecting these charters, other than the sailing vessels you have 
 spoken of ? 
 
 Answer. For the last steamers I have mentioned, the principals 
 were R. F. Loper, president of the Transportation Company, and 
 Thomas Clyde, president of the New York Express Company. 
 
 Question. Then the vessels you have recently chartered wei'e for 
 Captain Loper as president of his company, and for Thomas Clyde, 
 jun., as president of his couipany ? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 Question. Did you cliarge all of these persons five per cent. ? 
 
 Answer. That is what I expect them to pay me, sir. 
 
 Question. Why did (Captain Loper and Mr. Clyde effect these 
 charters through you rather than make them themselves ? 
 
 Answer. For the reason that I had employed barges to transport 
 coal. 
 
 Question. Did you ever charter any vessel, or agree to return or 
 pay to any person any portion of the earnings of the vessel ; have 
 you ever agreed to pay any person or persons any part of the earn- 
 ings of a vessel which you have chartered to any agent of the 
 government ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir ; not as I undei-stand the question — to an agent 
 of the government. 
 
 Question. To any other person than the owner 1 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. How long have you been in the ship broker business ? 
 
 Answer. I have been in it for my own account about twenty-five 
 years ; I have been at it since I was fifteen years of age. 
 
 Question. Do you know of any advantage being derived by the 
 government in chartering its vessels by private contract over the 
 former method of advertising for vessels ? 
 
 Answer. The advantage in doing it by private contract is, that 
 you have a better chance of obtaining the situation of the market 
 than by publishing it. 
 
( 42 ) 
 
 Question. Explain, if jou please, how that happens. 
 
 Answer. I will explain it in this way ; if you advertise for a 
 certain number of vessels, or a certain amount of transportation, you 
 at once put up the rates of freight to all points from the market 
 from which you are going to ship. But, under the system of 
 privately securing the freight, you have a chance to feel the market, 
 and govern yourself by the rates to the points where you are about 
 to ship, and you get it at about the rate at which it is ruling the 
 day you go into the market. 
 
 Question. Is it your opinion that the government has secured its 
 transportation cheaper than it would have secured it had it advertised 
 for vessels ? 
 
 Answer. In almost every case, as fur as my information goes, 
 they have. 
 
 Question. Has government been able to effect charters upon lower 
 terms than private individuals have been able to effect them ? 
 
 Answer. In almost every case, yes, as far as comes under my 
 knowledge. 
 
 Question. Have 3-ou chartered vessels to private individuals 
 while you have been acting for the government ? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 Question. Have you chartered at higher rates to individuals than 
 to the government ? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Committee did not examine Mr. M. S. Bulldey, 
 who was also brought prominently to their notice by 
 me, which I I'egret, as he, from my long official 
 acquaintance with him, and the prominent part which 
 he took in securing transports, was well informed 
 with reference to the zeal and fidelity exhibited by 
 me. Other witnesses (not referred to) were ex- 
 amined. Some of these had been in the business for 
 thirty years, are chartering vessels to the Quarter- 
 master's Department and merchants almost daily, but 
 like all other owners, testify that they have not 
 divided their contracts or commissions with any 
 oflBcer of the government. 
 
 I will here call your attention to the evidence of 
 the witnesses on this particular point, and will furnish 
 it in tlie order it appears in the testimony. 
 
 Mr. John P. Aker's evidence — 
 
( 43 ) 
 
 Question. I understand you to say that neither you nor your com- 
 pany have ever, directly or indirectly, paid, or promised to pay, nor 
 do you hold yourself under any obligation in equity or law to pay, 
 to any person, any sum of money or property in consideration of his 
 or their having assisted you in securing a contract, or in securing 
 favorable terms, of any description whatever ? 
 
 Answer. I have not paid anything, sir, to any gentleman ; that 
 is, no commission at all. As to the repairs on the Metamora, I will 
 say this to you : the order was given for her repairs by the govern- 
 ment in this way : she run from Fortress Monroe over to Cherry 
 Scone Inlet ; she carried despatches for the government before the 
 telegraph was laid there ; she made two or three trips a day across 
 there ; it is a very dangerous place, boisterous and rough ; at one 
 time she was ordered to go when no other vessel would go. Mr. 
 Tucker was there one night, and ordered her to go out, but the 
 captain refused to go. Mr. Tucker said the Baltimore despatches 
 must go, and if the vessel was damaged, he said, " I will see tliat 
 the government pays it." She went out, and she was strained and 
 damaged. Mr. Tucker said, " I think it is no more than just and 
 right that government should pay this expense. Your time shall 
 not be lost, and she shall be repaired." She was only gone ten 
 days, as the records will show. 1 employed a man last spring in 
 Washington, for awhile, to see to my affairs there which I could not 
 attend to, among other things, the Metamora, for which I paid 
 some $200. 
 
 Question. Who was that man ? 
 
 Answer. Captain Schultz. I paid him for seeing to the boat for a 
 couple of months, which amounted to a few hundred dollars, and 
 which I paid him. His name is E. Schultz. He was an agent 
 which the company authorized me to employ to see to the boat. I 
 did not call it the company. I asked him to assist me and see to 
 the boat, which he was kind enough to do, and I made him a present 
 of some amount. I think it was some four or five hundred dollars, 
 along in April or ]May. I look upon that as nothing more than what 
 is right. Some might call that a commission ; I do not. I asked 
 him to see to our business, and he did so. 
 
 Question. State now, if you please, whether you as the ship's 
 husband of the IMetamora, or any other boat, or as the owner or 
 part owner, paid any commission for, or reward, or promised any to 
 any person for his services in connection with securing charter 
 parties for you 1 
 
 Answer. None at all, sir, except the money I paid Schultz, and 
 to Mr. John Dauforth, (meaning Jas. B. Danforth.) 
 
 Question. Was that the only money of the kind you ever paid '. 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir ; that and to Schultz. 
 
 Qustion. Or ever promised to pay ? 
 
 Answer. Y'es, sir ; and since I have not paid one dollar as com- 
 mission on any of my boat or boats, that I am connected with.* 
 
 * It is to be presumed the remarks I made to one of tlie owners in August 
 !a«t. when T fiist heard of fliese commissions, stopped further payments. 
 Such would be the natural result. 
 
( 44 ) 
 
 ANTHONY GROVES. 
 
 Question. Have you ever, directly or indirectly, paid, or promised 
 to pay, any money or thing of value for the purpose of securing a 
 charter, other than the five per cent, that you paid which you have 
 mentioned'? (To Captain Leper). 
 
 Answer. No ; not one cent of money or any kind of present what- 
 ever. 
 
 Question. Have you ever, directly or indirectly, paid back any 
 portion of the money you have received for a charter to any person 
 or persons for the purpose of securing a charter party, or any other 
 advantage in connection therewith ? 
 
 Answer. Not one cent, sir. 
 
 Question. Have you ever employed any person or persons to se- 
 cure a discount of a charter party ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. Have you ever paid to any person, other than Mr. Le- 
 per, any per cent, in connection with the procurement of these 
 charters ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 STEPHEN FLANAGAN, 
 
 Question. Did you pay to any person, any percentage for the ves- 
 sels you chartered to Mr. Tucker ? 
 
 Answer. None, sir, to anybody but Captain Loper. 
 
 Question. Did you pay to Captain Loper five per cent, for the ves- 
 sels that were chartered to Mr. Tucker ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir ; those that I chartered direct to Mr. Tucker we 
 never paid a cent for. I can enumerate them : the Atlantic is one : 
 the Pendulum — she was lost in going from the Capes of Delaware to 
 Fortress Monroe. Of course we never got anything for her, but we 
 expect to up to the time she was lost ; the Robert Morris, up to the 
 first of April. 
 
 Question. Did Mr. Tucker send you to Captain Loper? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. Did he advise you to call on Captain Loper ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir, not to my knowledge. 
 
 Question. Have you ever paid or caused to be paid to any person, 
 any sum of money or other thing of value, for the purpose of secur- 
 ing your pay upon any charter party that was due you 1 
 
 Answer. No, sir, never. 
 
 WILMON WIIILLDIN. 
 
 Question. Have you, either directly or indirectly, in order to se- 
 cure your pay for a charter, been compelled to employ any broker, 
 or pay any percentage. 
 
 Answer. No, sir ; I have not been compelled to ; I have done it. 
 I will tell you all that I have paid. I have paid Captain Loper a 
 percentage for collecting my bills, and I have not paid anybody else 
 one cent. 
 
( 45 ) 
 
 Question. What did you pay him 1 
 
 Answer. I was to pay him five per cent, for collecting my bills. 
 I paid him that, and I paid him at one time — a man might as well 
 acknowledge his poverty — I paid him five per cent, for advancing me 
 money. I had a debt of ^30,000 on my shoulders. Government was 
 owing that much to me, but I had to pay it then, and I had to do 
 this. First I paid him a commission of five per cent. 
 
 Question. And then you paid him five per cent, more for advanc- 
 ing the money ? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 Question. Was the money which he advanced to you due on these 
 charter parties 1 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir, he advanced me money to carry on my business 
 with. 
 
 Question. Was as much money due from the government to you 
 on these charter parties as he advanced to you 1 
 
 Answer. Not quite, but pretty near. 
 
 Question. How long was that advance for ? 
 
 Answer. Until I got the money to pay him back. 
 
 Question. How long did you have it? 
 
 Answer. It was six months before I got it. 
 
 Question. Did he advance you this amount at the commencement 
 of the six months ? 
 
 Answer. It was soon after tlie comniencement of six months. 
 You see I went into very heavy expenses. 
 
 Question. Did you have Captain Loper's money for six months 
 or for any length of time '.' 
 
 Answer. Some of it I had for six months ; some of it \ did not. I 
 got what I wanted of it to carry my business on with. I had to meet 
 the expense of putting the boats in very good order. I had other 
 business too ; this Express Steamboat Company I had on my shoul- 
 ders made it necessary I should have the money. When I chartered 
 these boats I said to him, " Captain, I want you to have the charters 
 so drawn that I shall get ray money at the end of every month. In 
 that case I shall pay five per cent." He said he would, and the 
 charters were so drawn, but the government did not pay one cent for 
 six months. 
 
 Question. How much did you pay Captain Loper on the advance ? 
 
 Answer. I told him if he would advance me the money I would 
 give him ten per cent. 
 
 Question. And you paid him that ? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir _; I want you to understand, however, that 1 was 
 to pay him five per cent, commission. 
 
 Question. Was that besides ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir ; I said if I could get my money I would pay ten 
 per cent. I did not want women (the wives of my men) coming to 
 me for money and I not have it. If the government had payed me 
 according to contract I should have payed him five per cent.; as it is, 
 I paid him ten per cent. The paying of that five per cent., I think, 
 is justly chargeable to the government not paying me. 
 
( 46 ) 
 
 Question. Are you paying Captain Loper any sum of money on the 
 earnings of these vessels at this time ? 
 
 Answer. Not one cent. 
 
 Question. On the charter parties now you are not compelled to pay 
 him ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir ; I would rather pay him, because I do not under- 
 stand going to AVashingtou and collecting these things ; I do not un- 
 derstand the routine. 
 
 Question. You employ and give him five per cent, to collect? 
 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 Question. That arrangement still continues ? 
 
 Answer. Y^es, sir ; the five per cent, still continues. 
 
 Question. Have you ever been to collect any money'? 
 
 Answer. Never but once, and then I did not collect anything. I 
 was going down to Washington and had — I don't know what they 
 call it, but I think an order or certificate of indebtedness that I got 
 from Colonel Grossman here ; I was going down to Washington with 
 it. I had a cousin residing there. I gave it to General Spinner and 
 told him that Captain Loper would be there to receive the money. I 
 never received a cent except through Captain Loper, and 1 never 
 begrudged him a cent, because, if he did not do it, I Avould have to 
 run there and attend to it, and I do not know about these things. 
 
 S. S. BISHOP. 
 
 Question. Did you ever, directly or indirectly, through yourself 
 or another, pay or promise to pay to any person, any sum of money 
 or property for the purpose of securing you a charter 1 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. Did you ever pay to any person any money or anything 
 of value for the purpose of securing you the payment of any charter 
 party ? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 Question. Do you know of its having been done 1 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 AMASA C. HALL. 
 
 Question. Have you made any agreement, or are you under any 
 obligations in law or in honor, to divide with or })ay any one any sum 
 of money for assisting you in making these charters '? 
 
 Answer. Not to anybody, sir. 
 
 CHARLES COBLENS. 
 
 Question Did you ever pay or give any present or sum of money 
 to any person who was in the employment of the government, for the 
 purpose of getting him to aid you in getting a charter? 
 
 Answer. No, sir. 
 
 JOHN F. PICKRELL. 
 
 Question. Is any person to have, by any contract or agreement, 
 express or implied, any part of the profits that you are to receive 
 from these transactions with Coblens? 
 
 Answer. Not a cent, sir. 
 
( 47 ) 
 
 Question. Are you under any obligation, express or implied, legal, 
 equitable or honorable, to pay any person any portion of these 
 profits ? 
 
 Answer. I am not, sir ; such a thing has never been inthnated to 
 nie. 
 
 CAPTAIN IIEMIY C. HODCES. 
 
 Do you know of any person in the employment of the govern- 
 ment, either directly or indirectly receiving any money or valuable 
 thing for securing or aiding in securing a charter party ^ 
 
 Answer. 1 do not sir ; 1 never heard such a proposition made, 
 and I have never heard of its being made. 
 
 ANTHONY REYEOLD. 
 
 Question. Have you ever paid Loper any more than five per 
 cent. '? 
 
 Answer. No, .sir. Captain Loper knew nothing at all about the 
 charter of the Tucker. He was in Stonington. The man I purchased 
 her of in New York, told me the government offered him $500 a day 
 for her. I don't know anything about that, whether it was so or 
 not^ — only he said so. After I bought her, 1 insisted on that much 
 a day for her ; but Mr. Tucker said he would not reconnuend the 
 government to pay that — that he would not reconnuend the govern- 
 ment to pay over $300 a day for her. I felt that it was rather too 
 low for a boat of her class. After the things were all fixed and 
 settled, I mentioned then to Mr. Tucker that I was going to let 
 Captain Loper collect her charter, as he collected ours ; that it was 
 a great deal of trouble to me, and I could not attend to it. I didn't 
 understand it, and as he had collected the others, I would pay him 
 to collect that. He said, " Very well." T did not say a word to 
 Caj)tain Loper about her charter until after he came home from 
 Stonington. I then asked him if he would take it. Frequently 
 along during the season, the boats were behind considerably in their 
 payments, and I wanted money, and I went to Captain Loper, and 
 he agreed to advance me money. He advanced me once as high as 
 $15,000 on the charters. This paying five per cent, is all voluntary 
 on my part. Captain Loper offered to give it up three or four 
 months after the boats were chartered. I told him I would rather 
 let him do it. JMy principal business is farming. 
 
 Question. At what time did he off"er to give it up ? 
 
 Answer. About three or four months after the first boats were 
 chartered — before 1 owned the Tucker. 
 
 Question. At what time was that ? 
 
 Answer. I should safely say, it was in the neighborhood of three 
 months after the Express was chartered. She was not chartered 
 until after the Whilldin. 
 
 With such an array of testimonj, and from such 
 answers by every witness examined on this subject, 
 I submit it is not surprising the committee state " the 
 
( 48 ) 
 
 testimony may not warrant the conclusion that any 
 ofiiccr shared with him (Hall) the profits derived from 
 his business." I think they might safely and properly 
 iiave stated the reverse was established, not only as 
 applicable to Mr. Hall, hut to all the other parties. 
 
 The committee, when reporting on the charters of 
 twenty-six steamers, not made by me, think proper to 
 remark, " the terms of the charters of the steam 
 vessels are understood to compare favorably Avith 
 those effected with the Government in similar trans- 
 actions." Eight of these steamers, which is as far as 
 the comparison can be exactly carried, had been pre- 
 viously chartered by me for the Burnside and McClel- 
 lan Expeditions. The prices paid in both instances 
 were before the committee. On the occasions thus 
 commended, to a certain degree, by the committee, 
 the owners received sixty-tivo per cent, more than 
 when they were chartered through me. It is proper 
 to state, that in the cases to which reference is 
 made by the committee, the owners were to furnish 
 the coal for one steamer, and for twenty days for the 
 seven others, and that in the meantime two had been 
 rebuilt, somewhat improved and enlarged, but under 
 no possible circumstances can it be shown that the 
 prices which do not receive the censure of the com- 
 mittee were not fifty per cent, higher than those paid 
 by me for the identical steamers. 
 
 It is in evidence that on my return to Washington, 
 from my first visit to Fort Monroe (April 10th, 1862) 
 on learning that it was the intention and policy to 
 retain the transports for the McClellan Expedition 
 longer in the service, (the propriety of. which was 
 afterwards made manifest,) I wrote to Captain Hodges, 
 not at the suggestion of any one, proposing a reduc- 
 
( 49 ) 
 
 tion in the prices paid to steamers chartered at $150, 
 or less, ten per cent., all over $150, and less than $350, 
 twenty per cent., all over $350 twenty-five per cent. 
 I added, " you will please report to me the decision of 
 the parties as early as possible, as it is intended to 
 discharge at an early day such as may refuse to make 
 the abatement." 
 
 The reasons for the proposed reduction are given in 
 the letter which is appended to my testimony. May 
 I not respectfully ask if such a letter would have been 
 natural if I had had any other interest in these char- 
 ters than that of the government ; and also to inquire 
 whether if the committee had desired to make a 
 truthful impression upon the Senate and the public, 
 they would have entirely omitted all allusion to this 
 fact in their Report, which was prominently brought 
 to their notice more than once by me, and also by 
 other w^itnesses ? 
 
 If the Senators from Iowa, Maine and Maryland ' 
 supposed that three hundred and eighty-nine trans- 
 ports, procured from all the cities and prominent 
 towns from Portland to Baltimore, could be chartered 
 and despatched in fourteen days (see Captain Hodges' 
 testimony) avoiding and excluding ship brokers, the}^ 
 merely confess their want of familiarit}^ with the 
 u,sao;es of the world. The committee somewhere re- 
 mark, it is no apology for me to say that I did not 
 know Mr. Hall was receiving a commission. 
 
 Apology ! I have none to make. I deny the in- 
 sinuation that I gave to Mr. Hall, or any other broker, 
 agent or owner, any preference. I know of no occa- 
 sion for an apology. When Mr. Hall and other ship 
 bi^okers offered their transports, my knowledge of the 
 business of the world led to the inference (if I thought 
 4 
 
 / 
 
( 50 ) 
 
 about it at all) that they were receiving the usual 
 commission. To pretend anything else would be 
 an admission that I was ignorant of an established 
 custom. The evidence of Mr. Bishop shows, that 
 the day before he was examined, he chartered a 
 transport to the regular Quartermaster, on which he 
 states he received a commission of five per cent.; 
 and that a few days before, he had even chartered 
 transports for the Government from Captain Loper on 
 which he expected (as a matter of course) to receive 
 the usual commission of five per cent. This estab- 
 ^J lishes the custom, which is more general with sailing 
 vessels than steamers. 
 
 I cannot, however, express my views in any more 
 pertinent manner than I did in my report with refer- 
 ence to the McClellan Expedition, made to you April 
 5th, 1862, from which I here introduce the following 
 extract. 
 
 All parties who offered suitable transports in reply to your adver- 
 tisement had been requested to meet me. With few exceptions, such 
 vessels were taken, and generally at a reduction from the bids. These, 
 however, were by no means sufficient. As much publicity as possi- 
 ble was given, without further resort to the newspapers, that the gov- 
 ernment was in the market to charter vessels. In fact, with your 
 advertisement and our action, it was notorious. Every owner of a 
 vessel had the opportunity to deal directly with the representatives 
 of the department. It was publicly avowed that the government pre- 
 ferred this course. When, however, a transport was offered, I did 
 not stop to ask the party whether he was the sole owner, part owner, 
 or merely represented the owners. Time being such an important 
 element, it was enough for me to know (or I thought it was) that the 
 party had ptoper authority to charter, that the vessel was suitable, 
 and offered at the fair current price. To have refused suitable ves- 
 sels till I could have ascertained who were the owners, or because 
 they preferred to send an agent or even pay a ship broker, might 
 have taken weeks, instead of days, to have secured the required ton- 
 nage, and also greatly increased the cost, by having a part of the 
 fleet under charter waiting for the balance. I am induced to make 
 these remarks in consequence of the objections which I have recently 
 heard urged against the interference of agents or ship brokers. It 
 may not be fully understood that in all great maritime cities negotia- 
 
( 51 ) 
 
 tions for the sale, charter, aud freighting of vessels are carried on, to 
 a considerable extent at least, through ship brokers — a business class 
 as firmly established as stock, land, money, or merchandise brokers. 
 In New York they are well known as a class comprising many men 
 of integrity and intelligence, whose services are not ignored by ship- 
 owners. In France, Belgium, Prussia, and many other places, the 
 charges for their services are regulated by a legalized tariff, from 
 which the broker is not allowed to deviate. In Great Britain and 
 the United States he is paid a commission, which, in the absence of 
 a special agreement with the owner for whom he is acting, is regu- 
 lated by custom and sanction of local chambers of commerce, boards 
 of trade, &c. 
 
 In the case under consideration, however, no application was made 
 to ship brokers, no commission tendered or asked, and no preferences 
 shown. The wants of the government were made public. Every 
 party interested had the opportunity of direct negotiation. The 
 business was conducted with entire fairness to the owners of vessels, 
 and with fidelity to the government. I beg to hand herewith a state- 
 ment, prepared by Captain Hodges, of the vessels chartered, which 
 exhibits the prices paid and the parties with whom the contracts 
 were made. From this it is shown there were engaged : 
 113 steamers, at an average price per day of - - - - $218 10 
 188 schooners, at an average price per day of - - - - 24 45 
 
 88 barges, at an average price per day of _ - - - 14 27 
 
 In thirty-seven days from the time I received the order in Wash- 
 ington (and most of it was accomplished within thirty days) these 
 vessels were laden at Perryville, Alexandria, and Washington, (the 
 place of embarking the troops liaving been changed after all the 
 transports had sailed, which caused confusion and delay,) with 
 121,500 men, 14,592 animals, 1,150 wagons, 44 batteries, besides 
 pontoon bridges, ambulances, telegraph materials, and the inunense 
 quantity of equipage, &c., required for an army of such magnitude. 
 The only loss of which I have heard (and I am confident there is no 
 other) is eight mules and nine barges, which latter went ashore in a 
 gale within a few miles of Fort jVIonroe, the cargoes being saved. 
 With tliis trifling exception, not the slightest accident has occurred, 
 to my knowledge. 
 
 The custom of employing ship brokers by owners of 
 vessels can be further demonstrated by reference to 
 the immense business of the Quartermaster iu this 
 city. His advertisements for transports a[)pear daily 
 in the prominent papers here, and occasionally else- 
 where. Yet I am warranted in stating that more than 
 nine-tenths of all the charters he makes are through 
 commission merchants or ship brokers, and that there 
 
( 52 ) 
 
 is no difference In the price whether he deals directly 
 with the owners or their appointed agents. The "Su- 
 perintendent of coal shipments for the Navy," who is 
 stationed here for no other purpose than to secure such 
 transports, will also attest the latter fact. Custom has 
 so estal)lished. In the case of the barges especially 
 a ship broker soon became a necessity. Most of 
 them were en^aized bv Mr. M. S. Buckley, before re- 
 ferred to, who made no charge to any partij. They 
 were taken at the close of winter, when their small 
 savings of the previous year were much exhausted. 
 The government made them no payments for three 
 months. Many have been postponed for half a year, 
 and in some instances even longer. To the meantime 
 money and supplies were indispensable, for which an 
 assignment of the charter party was an available se- 
 curity, and recourse to a commission merchant or ship 
 broker the natural channel to j)i'ocure relief. For 
 these and other reasons, among which may be stated 
 man}^ of the captains were unable to write, (which 
 appears in the tables in the testimony,) they, or most 
 of them, soon applied to such agents to transact their 
 business, make the necessary advances, &c. It may 
 be asked why with these views did I exclude Captain 
 Loper from commissions ? The answer is clear and 
 patent. I proposed to extend to him my confidence, 
 to be influenced by his judgment in the insiDCction of 
 the transports offered. It was therefore essentially 
 requisite he should be entirely disinterested. He pro- 
 fessed his willingness (as is clearly proved) to thus 
 serve the government, of which I availed. But I am 
 dwelUng on this point longer than the occasion de- 
 mands. 
 
 In this connection it may not be improper to state 
 
( 53 ) 
 
 that man J of these barges were destroyed by fire by 
 orders of the General in command, to prevent their 
 falling into the hands of the enemy. Although this 
 occurred in June last, no payments for these losses, 
 although such risk was dh*ectly assumed by the De- 
 partment, has j^et been made. 
 
 Here I may observe, when thus acting for the Go- 
 vernment in large transactions, fixed prices were es- 
 tablished, after diligent inn[uiry as to the proper rate, 
 whenever passible, without reference, as to whether 
 they were made with the owners or their appointed 
 agents. For the McClellan Expedition exact prices were 
 male for schooners and barges, and although such an 
 immense number was required and procured, not even *' 
 one co'dl now be chartered for less. With steamers 
 it was impossible to have an inflexible law as to price, 
 especially on the occasions when all that were availa- 
 ble were required. As a rule they were chartered 
 for only thirty days. It was not supposed they would 
 hi longer required. Tiiey were to be loadcl to their 
 utinsjst capacity with saldiers, many of whom were 
 utterly reckless as to the damage and injury they oc- 
 casioned, sufficient in most cases to render expensive 
 repairs and refitting necessary before their ordinary 
 business could be resumed. Many were engaged in 
 regular and profitable trade, in well established lines, 
 to be abandoned, never, in some cases, to be resumed. 
 No owner knew how long his vessel might be retained 
 in service, or on what day she might be thrown on his 
 hands. 
 
 They were to be sent into waters with which those 
 in command were not familiar. They were to be 
 guided in narrow, crooked and shallow rivers by un- 
 known pilots. They were to be under the directions 
 
( 51 ) 
 
 of officers of the army, many of whom were inex- 
 perienced, while any disobedience of an order, how- 
 ever improper or even reckless to the property or Hfe 
 \ itself, exposed the offender to immediate pimishment, 
 Itnd the owner to the loss of his previous earnings. 
 Insurance, particularly on the river boats which were 
 to make an outside voyage in the boisterous month of 
 March, was enormously high. In some cases as much 
 as ten per cent, a month was demanded. This on a 
 vessel worth $50,000, even if chartered so high as 
 $500 per day, would be one-third of the charter 
 money. On steamers of very light draught of water 
 sent to Hatteras even 33 3 per cent, for the voyage 
 was refused. Under such circumstances minimum 
 rates for ordinary service should not be expected, 
 j I will admit that had it been known these 
 transports would be so long retained in the service, 
 they could have been procured at lower rates. When 
 this was known I made the effort before referred to, 
 which in most cases was successful. 
 
 I now claim the right to submit some facts in 
 connection with this subject which the committee 
 have ignored, but which it is due to myself should 
 be stated in my reply. 
 
 I asseverate that Captain Loper, A. C. Hall, 
 and all the other parties to whom reference is 
 made, or any of them, have never proposed or sug- 
 gested to me in any manner to take or receive any 
 interest in any charter or other transaction, nor have 
 I received, nor do I expect to receive, from them or 
 any other person in their behalf, or any of them, 
 one farthing of the money they have received from 
 the government or from the owners of the transports 
 thus chartered. 
 
( 55 ) 
 
 "^1 here repeat I had not the charge of the ordhiary 
 current business of transportation for the Quarter- 
 master's Department ; as a rule, it was only in great 
 emergencies that I was called upon, the most import- 
 ant of which, w'ere sending the McClellan Expedition 
 to and from the Peninsulay^ I need not now hesitate 
 to state the exigencies under which I acted, and in 
 forming judgment of my acts, these should be con- 
 sidered. During my first interview with the Presi- 
 dent and General McClellan, relative to the propcfsed 
 movement by water, the time estiuiated as requisite 
 was a serious objection with the President, At this 
 interview, the President made the impressive declara- 
 tion, that each day's delay was costing the country a 
 million of dollars, and that every hour of detention 
 was even more disastrous to the nation than the loss of 
 the money. As the committee have magnified charters 
 for 30 days into charters for 365, 1 may at least be par- 
 doned for reducing the President's estimate of the 
 results of delay to hours, $83,333.33, and even to 
 minutes, of $1,388.89. The entire cost of the expe- 
 dition for a month, the time for which it was char- 
 tered, was less than the President's estimate of the 
 loss in money by delay for a single day. I therefore 
 feel that in such an emergency, I need not further dis- 
 cuss wh'ether the charter of the barge Delaware, with 
 a capacity to move 1000 men at $70 per day, and the 
 few other charters to which the committee take ex- 
 ception, were or were not wisely made. I have al- 
 ready stated the great expedition with which the 
 movement was made. The next prominent duty in 
 which I was engaged, connected with the procurement 
 of transports, was in bringing back the army of the 
 Potomac. On the 18th day of August, a few minutes 
 
( 56 ) 
 
 after three o'clock P. M., I was requested bj you to 
 start forthwith for Fort Monroe to expedite the return 
 of the army. I replied I could take the train that left 
 at 3? o'clock. You rejoined, " Go, and make the whole 
 power of the War Department bend to bringing that 
 army away in the shortest f)C)ssible space of time." 
 The General-in-Chief was present, and in order that 
 nothing might be left unsaid to impress ujDon me the 
 profound necessity for the strain of every sinew of the 
 national arm to effect an immediate movement of the 
 army, used this expression: "Remember this is a 
 great emergency, when every soldier you get here is 
 worth a gold dollar a minute." 
 
 I knew that General Pope's army was retiring, and 
 the enemy was moving to place himself between that 
 army and the capital. ^TJnder the pressure of orders 
 and flicts like these, every transport then at Fort 
 Monroe, or which touched at that place, was chartered, 
 and others were ordered by telegraph to be sent there 
 in forty-eight hours. The result w^as, that in less than 
 six days, over 80,000 men were on their way to Wash- 
 ington, and within three weeks 27,500 animals, 2, GOO 
 wagons and the batteries belonging to the various Di- 
 visions, with the immense equipage of such an army, 
 were ready for offensive or defensive service at the 
 point indicated by the General-in-Chief. This again 
 was accomplished without the loss of a human life<'^ 
 
 In speaking of movements of such magnitude, involv- 
 ing consequences so vital, it would seem to belittle 
 the subject to refer to inculpatory insinuations against 
 individuals, but as the fict is — so it must be stated — 
 that on this occasion not one of the persons who 
 are the subject of the animadversions of the com- 
 mittee furnished through me any of the additional 
 
 ^ RD-94 < 
 
( 57 ) 
 
 transports required for this service, or was in any way 
 connected with the movement. 
 
 I fully recognize the truth, that in this momentous 
 drama, involving con-sequences so grave, that the civi- 
 lized world are its spectators, no one as an individual 
 is of any consequence outside of the circle in which his 
 interest and affections are centered. But when that in- 
 dividual from his official position represents by his acts 
 and conduct, even to a humble extent, the adminis- 
 tration to whose hands is committed the defence of the 
 principle of self-government, he may then question 
 the propriety of such insinuations and "conclusions," 
 based on such evidence. 
 
 I remain sir, very respectfully. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN TUCKER. 
 
LEJa'i3 
 
0° --•■•"- °o 
 
 
 *. ^■3?-4^;.'' 
 
 .i^' 
 
 i 
 
 
 i<*' 
 "■X' 
 
 '>. 
 
 C^ .*,^/?;??^;^ o 
 
 •b V 
 
 
 V 
 
 '^0 Apv\ 
 
 
 
 ' .0-' 
 
a\ 
 
 
 is^.\ 
 
 
 .< 
 
 
 .-^ 
 
 
 
 
 5^, 
 
 
 iO-v:.. ^ A^^ I:-. 
 
 >'~^ "~'Ks<r' 
 
 
 
 
 ..^ 
 
 V 
 
 (- -^-^i^v 
 
 
 4> 
 
 
 "^^.^^ 
 
 
 
 r->' 
 
 
 !>'•»<» 
 
 '^f'^-' 
 
 
 .V 
 
 C ' » • ^ 
 
 
 ,0^ 
 
 
 ^f 
 
 /- o < 
 
 j7 ( 
 
 
 
 DOBBS BROS 
 
 LISRARV BINOI 
 
 OINO 
 
 ST. AUGUSTINE -'^ <.-^ 0* 
 
 M^m ''LA. 
 
 
 i?f^ 
 
 
 o ^ 
 
 \teim^"^ _ ?^^ 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 013 760 375 5