Tweet
Comrades,
It isn't often that we have the opportunity to review material from the period dealing with the principle depots. Thought the following might make for somewhat interesting reading and is presented for review and perhaps discussion.
During the latter months of 1861, and through early 1862, the House pursued an investigation concerning abuses in the procurement of army supplies. The committee appointed to conduct interviews (the Van Wycke committee) traveled from city to city in the loyal states interviewing a host of people involved in the procurement of goods, horses, and transportation on both a state level, and procurement of the same by the Central Government. The testimony is contained in the Serial Set, a record of papers and reports submitted to the Congress, and sometimes referred to as the "Congressional Record."
The following is testimony of Col. G. H. Crosman, in charge of the main depot at Philadelphia, taken from a "series" of committee interviews concerning, but not limited to, the procurement of tents and shoes by officers of the USQMD in the East. Col. Crosman relates information which is of interest to those of us who are students of this sort of thing and is presented in full.
I apologize for the length but feel it worthy and of such merit as to excuse.
Serial Set, Volume 1143, pg. 880
Philadelphia, March 6, 1862
G. H. Crosman sworn:
Q. Please state your official position.
A. I am deputy quartermaster general with the rank of lieutenant colonel.
Q. How long have you been in the service?
A. I graduated in 1823, and have been nearly forty years a commissioned officer.
Q. Have you any knowledge of a contract having been made for furnishing sibley tent poles and iron tripods under an advertisement of Col. Vinton, at New York, dated July 17, 1861.
A. I have no other knowledge of it than be conveyed in a letter written by Mr. Poole, of Wilmington, Delaware, which I saw.
Q. Have you since that time made any contract for furnishing these tent-poles and tripods?
A. Yes, sir; since the date of that advertisement.
Q. To what extant and with whom?
A. I should have to refer to my books to give you exact information. As near as I recollect, late September, being under an order to furnish a large quantity of Sibley's tents for the army, and having no time to advertise for them, I examined the prices paid for Sibley tent-poles and tripods, and contracted with several parties, among whom I recollect the names of Simons, Henry S. McComb, and Dolby; some of whom made poles and tripods alone, and others both tents, poles, and tripods, at a price one dollar less than been previously been paid by my predecessor on a previous contract. I cannot now, without reference to my books, recollect the names of all the parties.
Q. Will you furnish the committee with a correct list of the names and of the prices paid?
A. I will.
Q. Can you state from recollection the prices paid for tents and for the tripods and poles?
A. I do not remember the exact price now. I know that my tents averaged from thirty-three to thirty-five dollars at one time; but cotton duck went up, and I had to give more for them subsequently.
Q. Were the persons with whom you made contracts mostly manufacturers of those articles?
A. They were persons who had previously been making tents for my predecessor.
Q. Are you acquainted with Henry S. McComb?
A. Yes sir. He was at one time largely engaged in manufacturing wheels and other iron works for railroads, and at the time I came here he was making tents for my predecessor.
Q. Can you state his present business?
A. I believe he is more largely engaged in manufacturing leather than anything else.
Q. Do you know the prices which you have been paying any of these men?
A. I will give the committee an exact statement of the prices paid.
Q. Can you state the number of tent-poles and tripods you have purchased?
A. I can and will, after consulting my books.
The examination was here suspended for a time. Upon being resumed, the examination continued as follows:
Q. Can you now furnish the committee with a statement of the number of poles and tripods you have purchased, of whom purchased, and the prices paid; also a statement of the cost of the Sibley tents complete?
A. Yes, sir. I hand you a paper containing the statement you desire.
The paper was as follows:
---
Purchases by Lieut. Col. G. H. Crosman, deputy quartermaster general, of tripods for sibley tents, of malleable iron, and of tents complete, including chains, &c.
1861
Sept. 25, H. Simons..for tripods, poles, bands, and gudgeons, complete..10,000@ $3.40
Do............Do.....L. B. M. Dolby..............2,000@$3.50
Do............Do.....W. P. Wilstach & Co.....2,000@$3.50
Sept. 27, Do.....Esler & Bros.................2,000@$3.50
Sept. 30, Do.....Charles S. Close...........2,000@$3.50
Oct. 1, Do.....Henry Simons...............1,000@$3.40
Nov. 29, Do.....L. B. M. Dolby.................736@$3.40
Oct. 1, L. B. M. Dolby....for poles.....1,3000@$.70
Oct. 14, H. S. McComb...for Sibley tents, complete....3500@$43.80
Total number of tripods and poles...23,236
In all orders given for the above tripods it was particularly specified: "Top, to be malleable iron; legs, best charcoal bloom iron, and the pole of seasoned white pine.
The price paid by Col. Charles Thomas, assistant quartermaster general, United States army, March 18, 1859, the last purchase previous to the above, to Simons, Coleman & Co., was $4.25.
---
Q. I see by this statement that on September 25, 1861, Dolby furnished 2,000 at $3.50, and on Nov. 29th, 736 at $3.40. How is that difference in price explained?
A. I found out that I could get them less than the first price, and when I ascertained that I would not give him any more at $3.50.
Q. You have read the testimony of Mr. Dolby. What explanation is there of the fact of his receiving from you ninety-four cents more for tent-poles and tripods than he offered to make them for in New York?
A. I have no explanation to make. It is a matter I know nothing about. I knew nothing about his bid to Col. Vinton until several months after it was made.
Q. You had not been advised in any manner, officially or otherwise, of the bids which had been put in at New York?
A. No, sir; not in relation to tents and poles. Indeed, I did not know that he had advertised for tents.
Q. What is the practice of the quartermaster's department in regard to such matters; are they in correspondence with each other?
A. The quartermaster's department was organized under a very different system from that which is prevailing now. The present is a new state of things. Before the war broke out we never had a depot of clothing except in Philadelphia. The different quartermasters have not been in the habit of sending their bids to each other; but it is necessary that they should do so now, especially in reference to clothing and equipments, and that they should know what each other are doing; what every one has on hand, and the quartermaster general should know what all has on hand. There ought to be but one head for purchasing all articles of a particular description. The effect of sending five or six government agents into market to buy the same article is destructive of the public credit, and compels you to pay more money for the same goods, as well as to pay more agents.
Q. What has been the consequence in reference to tent poles and tripods, of not having such a correspondence between the different quartermasters?
A. In this particular case it resulted in my having to pay more than I otherwise should have paid.
Q. What is the difference?
A. The difference between the lowest bid made to Col. Vinton and the price I paid. I referred to my books and found what my predecessor had been paying for the same articles, and as I got them at one dollar less, I thought I had made a very good bargain. If I had known what offer had been made to Col. Vinton I should not have paid more than that, and should have got it done as much as less as possible.
Q. Would it not be for the interest of the government to have bids made at the different places of letting, communicated immediately to the quartermasters at other places?
A. Certainly, if you do not adopt the better policy of one purchaser.
Q. If it were a regulation of the department that you, for instance, should send the bids made for these various articles at your depot, to the corresponding quartermasters at New York, Boston, and Cincinnati; would it not be of very great advantage to those men if they had contracts to make for the same articles?
A. Certainly; and I have suggested to the quartermaster general the idea that we should act in concert with each other so that each one may know not only what the others buy, but what each one has to spare.
Q. If this system of communication between the different quartermasters, of which you have spoken, had prevailed heretofore, you think a large amount of money would have been saved in this very transaction?
A. that was my opinion. I believed so then, and I believe so now. I calculated the time it would take to make the advertisement, examine the bids, award and make the contract, and have the articles made. It was late September when I received the order. The latter part of October is cold, and these tents were wanted everywhere in the mountains of Virginia. the troops were suffering the want of tents, and it was my duty to supply the army promptly. I did not want the army to say that I, an old soldier, was here and the army was suffering through my delay.
Q. Has the government a large depot here for army clothing?
A. A very large depot-the largest in the United States, of which I have sole charge.
Q. What amount of material or of clothing have you on hand at the present time; what is the character; by whom has it been made, and by whom inspected?
A. I have a very large amount of clothing; enough, I suppose, to equip 200,000 men for three or four months, perhaps longer. I have also a large amount of material which is unmade, and which I am not making up now, because they have not drawn from my depot largely of late. Of some articles I have enough for double that number of men for that length of time, as for instance, shirts, drawers, stockings, and shoes, form essential articles, which I keep in larger quantities than anything else. I have 600,000 pairs of drawers, as one item; some 320,000 shirts; and some 300,000 boots and shoes. Those are essential articles which it will never do to be without; we must always have them on hand. A very considerable quantity the clothing I have on hand is of the regular army standard fabric. All the materials i made up are of that class; but there is in the depot a considerable supply of what is called irregular clothing, made up of black doeskin cassimere, dark gray cloth, and some satinets, which were bought at a time when the army standard cloths could not be had, or when what were in the market were held at enormous prices. the clothing has been chiefly made by contractors, while a considerable quantity has been made here under the superintendence of the regular officer of the arsenal. I do not remember the names of all the inspectors, but the chief inspector was Mr. Kerne, who was appointed by the Secretary of War, Mr. Cameron. He and his assistants inspected the clothing.
Q. Were the assistants appointed by the secretary of War?
A. I think all but one or two. The clerks even were appointed by him.
Q. Is it the usual course for the Secretary of War to make these appointments himself, or is it usual for the quartermaster, who is himself responsible to his superiors, to make the selection of his own agents?
A. I should say in reply to that question, that up to the period when I first came here, after the Mexican war, in 1848, it was not the usual or customary for the Secretary of war to make those appointments; that they had always been made by the officer in charge here. But about that time, or shortly afterwards, upon the election of a President, there was a general turning out of officers, and new appointments by the President. The same thing has occurred since upon every new election of President; and since that time I may say that it has been customary for the secretaries to appoint most of the officers, even those having salaries as small as $800.00, and from that up. Inspectors of shoes, of leather, the chief cutter, and even superintendents, have been turned out and other appointed. It has been a political machine to reward political favorites. I have had men imposed upon me in confidential positions, in whom I have had no choice, and whom I would not have retained have I had had the power to remove them. I had no such power until the present Secretary of War, Mr. Stanton, gave it to me.
Q. What has been the consequences of this method of appointing officers for you?
A. A constant loss to the United States in every case where it has been done. Loss has been liable to be incurred, and has been incurred, to my knowledge. I know one man, appointed several years ago, as chief cutter, who kept a grog-shop, and when garrison flags had to be cut, worth $40 a piece, he spoiled a large amount of them. This arose from his entire incompetency.
Q. Has there been any recent examination of your department in regard to its concerns? If so, state what it has been.
A. There has been a very general and particular examination into the operation of the arsenal, and of the manner in which business is conducted here. This was done by Messrs. Covode and Odell, of the House of representatives, who were here for two or three days. they went through the arsenal with me, and examined the manner in which business was conducted, and witnessed themselves the incompetency of the chief inspector, Mr. Kerne, who condemned, just before they arrived, a lot of blankets which were perfectly good, and, within the same hour, passed another lot of blankets which were good for nothing. They saw the blankets themselves immediately after, and heard the facts related, which occurred within an hour.
Q. What were the circumstances connected with the acceptance and rejection of these blankets?
A. It happened as these two gentlemen and myself were leaving the arsenal, two loads of blankets drove into the yard. As I had been showing them everything in the arsenal, I called out to the drayman and told him to bring me one of those blankets. He did so, and I handed it to Messrs. Covode and Odell, who pronounced it immediately to be a shoddy blanket, as I did myself. Mr. Covode pulled out of it a piece of an old nightcap, which had happened to escape being chopped up fine. It was an inch and a half long. We called Kerne up, the very inspector that had passed them as good, and I questioned him in the presence of these two gentlemen. I asked him if he had passed those blankets as fulfilling the army requirement. He said he had. What is the matter with them, he asked. This is the matter with them, said Mr. Covode, as he put his finger right through the blanket.
Q. Did the inspector look at all of them?
A. No, sir. We then sent for an armful of them and examined them. They were all shoddy blankets. I then went with those two gentlemen to the place where blankets were inspected. On arriving there we saw many other blankets of the same description, which Kerne had passed as good, and which he himself, being present, admitted that he had passed as good. We then saw a large pile of blankets, I do not know how many hundreds, which he had rejected and which were being sent away. these two gentlemen, my two inspectors, and myself examined them, and we all five pronounced them good blankets, so far as we could judge. We called Kerne up and inquired why he had rejected them. He admitted that he had rejected them. I asked him to point out the defects. He could not, and did not do it, but only said that he did not like them. We all questioned him in various ways, and the only answer we could get was that he did not like them.
Q. How do you account for this action of Inspector Kerne?
A. By his utter incompetency. I do not presume to impugn his integrity, for I had no information which would justify my doing so, but from his manner, and the character he sustained here, I was forced to believe he was entirely incompetent for his position.
Q. By whom was he appointed?
A. By the then Secretary of War, Mr. Cameron.
Q. Is Mr. Kerne still in that position?
A. No, sir; I dismissed him instantly. I had a written letter of discharge two days before those gentlemen arrived here, but at the request of his friends, one or two of the most prominent men in this city, I had consented to make a re-examination of the facts which has been reported to me, to see if I had erred in my conclusions, and on this very Monday morning on which these gentlemen arrived here I had sent for Kerne and offered him the benefit of an umpirage on what had occurred. We agreed that the matter should be left to two or three contractors, or respectable merchants of Philadelphia, to say, whether he was right, or I was right; that is to say, whether his judgment had erred in passing goods which ought not to have been passed, or whether I was right in saying that he ought to be discharged for doing what he had done. The arrival of those two gentlemen, and the occurrence of the matters which I have related, avoided the necessity of carrying out that arrangement. After the gentlemen left I went to my office and discharged Kerns immediately.
Q. is the position of inspector an important one?
A. It is of the utmost importance, as will be seen from the fact that the disbursing officer pays out the public money upon the certificate of the inspector. The printed certificate upon the voucher of the articles purchased sets out the quantity purchased, the prices paid, and the date of the delivery of the goods. The inspector's certificate essentially reads" I certify that I have examined such and such goods, and found them equal to the sample or standard by which they were purchased," and his name is signed to it. Below that is the receipt of the storekeeper, stating that he had received on a certain day so many articles of such a description, &c. that certificate and that receipt constitute the money voucher upon which the contractor was paid.
Q. Not being able to attend to these matters personally, of course you have to rely on these inspectors.
A. As a matter of course; from necessity it must be so.
Q. It is vastly important, then, to the public interest that none but men of the highest skill, honesty, and capacity should be appointed inspectors?
A. Certainly it is of vital importance, and always has been. I am greatly in hopes that this occurrence will put an end to such a method of appointing inspectors; it has been going on ever since 1848.
Q. Did you make an investigation, also, in regard to manufactured goods?
A. Yes, sir; the same result was found upon inspection of the made-up clothing, and I am now identifying, as far as possible to do so, the owners of those goods.
Q. Is there any difficulty in making such identification?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the difficulty?
A. In the early stages of this matter, and when goods were coming in here rapidly, they were inspected by Kerne and his assistants and thrown in a pile, and in some instances, having no marks upon them, it has been difficult if not impossible to trace them to the owners. Wherever I have been able to trace them to the contractors (and that is the order now to all the inspectors and clerks employed in the arsenal), I have thrown them upon their hands, and refuse to pay for them, the contractors, however, always having the privilege of replacing them with good, sound goods.
Q. Can you furnish the committee with a statement of the amount of this irregular clothing on hand now, and which are not adapted for army use. I can in a few days.
The following statement was subsequently furnished by the witness:
Army Clothing and Equipage Office
Philadelphia, April 4, 1862
Sir: I have to acknowledge the receipt of a letter from Theodore F. Andrews, clerk of committee, asking the amount and character of irregular clothing on hand at this department, and have the honor to report:
There is on hand at the Schuylkill arsenal the following irregular clothing, viz:
40,611 uniform coats
69,142 great coats
185,216 pair trousers
708 jackets
I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
G. H. Crosman,
Deputy Quartermaster General
Hon. E. B. Washburne,
Chairman Com. of Gov't Contracts, Washington, D. C.
Q. From you long experience and your knowledge in reference to articles of this kind, what in your judgment would be the best manner for the government to dispose of them?
A. I think the best mode would be, in the first place, to issue them to prisoners of war, if they are to be clothed by the government, and also to the negroes. That would be the first disposition to be made of them; and then they might be issued to prisoners of the army-our own men in confinement for offences. After that I would sell them in small parcels at various points and at suitable seasons, so as not to put too many upon the market at one time or at one place.
Q. Is the value of these articles diminished by keeping them?
A. I think not. They are kept with great care, and I do not think they will deteriorate. In reference to the depreciation of price, it is the opinion of merchants here that all the goods I have bought, will sell to-day for more than I paid for them, and the cotton goods would bring more than double the price.
Q. What are those cotton goods?
A. Jeans, such as are used for bed-ticking, cotton flannel for drawers, and seven-eighths drilling for linings. I have a large supply of those on hand. Some articles which I have paid ten cents for sell in the market 21 1/2 and 22 cents.
Q. What is your opinion as to the comparative merits of sewed and pegged shoes for army use?
A. For spring and winter use I prefer the pegged shoe. I bought some 46,000 pairs of them, apparently very good, at $1.25 to $1.30 a pair, intending them for General Banks division of the army; but some of them got to Washington, instead of going to General Bank's column, which they were bought for, and I got rapped over the knuckles for buying, for the quartermaster general did not approve of it.
Q. From your own experience in the army, and as quartermaster, taking into consideration the difference in the cost of pegged shoes and sewed shoes, and taking into consideration also the different seasons, which, in your judgment, is the best for the army?
A. The pegged shoes. I had rather have them at the same price. The British army in canada use nothing else. the French army to-day use nothing else. I could have saved the government hundreds of thousands of dollars if they allowed me to purchase pegged shoes.
End of Crosman testimony
With regards,
John
Jno. Sarver
Cin. O.
It isn't often that we have the opportunity to review material from the period dealing with the principle depots. Thought the following might make for somewhat interesting reading and is presented for review and perhaps discussion.
During the latter months of 1861, and through early 1862, the House pursued an investigation concerning abuses in the procurement of army supplies. The committee appointed to conduct interviews (the Van Wycke committee) traveled from city to city in the loyal states interviewing a host of people involved in the procurement of goods, horses, and transportation on both a state level, and procurement of the same by the Central Government. The testimony is contained in the Serial Set, a record of papers and reports submitted to the Congress, and sometimes referred to as the "Congressional Record."
The following is testimony of Col. G. H. Crosman, in charge of the main depot at Philadelphia, taken from a "series" of committee interviews concerning, but not limited to, the procurement of tents and shoes by officers of the USQMD in the East. Col. Crosman relates information which is of interest to those of us who are students of this sort of thing and is presented in full.
I apologize for the length but feel it worthy and of such merit as to excuse.
Serial Set, Volume 1143, pg. 880
Philadelphia, March 6, 1862
G. H. Crosman sworn:
Q. Please state your official position.
A. I am deputy quartermaster general with the rank of lieutenant colonel.
Q. How long have you been in the service?
A. I graduated in 1823, and have been nearly forty years a commissioned officer.
Q. Have you any knowledge of a contract having been made for furnishing sibley tent poles and iron tripods under an advertisement of Col. Vinton, at New York, dated July 17, 1861.
A. I have no other knowledge of it than be conveyed in a letter written by Mr. Poole, of Wilmington, Delaware, which I saw.
Q. Have you since that time made any contract for furnishing these tent-poles and tripods?
A. Yes, sir; since the date of that advertisement.
Q. To what extant and with whom?
A. I should have to refer to my books to give you exact information. As near as I recollect, late September, being under an order to furnish a large quantity of Sibley's tents for the army, and having no time to advertise for them, I examined the prices paid for Sibley tent-poles and tripods, and contracted with several parties, among whom I recollect the names of Simons, Henry S. McComb, and Dolby; some of whom made poles and tripods alone, and others both tents, poles, and tripods, at a price one dollar less than been previously been paid by my predecessor on a previous contract. I cannot now, without reference to my books, recollect the names of all the parties.
Q. Will you furnish the committee with a correct list of the names and of the prices paid?
A. I will.
Q. Can you state from recollection the prices paid for tents and for the tripods and poles?
A. I do not remember the exact price now. I know that my tents averaged from thirty-three to thirty-five dollars at one time; but cotton duck went up, and I had to give more for them subsequently.
Q. Were the persons with whom you made contracts mostly manufacturers of those articles?
A. They were persons who had previously been making tents for my predecessor.
Q. Are you acquainted with Henry S. McComb?
A. Yes sir. He was at one time largely engaged in manufacturing wheels and other iron works for railroads, and at the time I came here he was making tents for my predecessor.
Q. Can you state his present business?
A. I believe he is more largely engaged in manufacturing leather than anything else.
Q. Do you know the prices which you have been paying any of these men?
A. I will give the committee an exact statement of the prices paid.
Q. Can you state the number of tent-poles and tripods you have purchased?
A. I can and will, after consulting my books.
The examination was here suspended for a time. Upon being resumed, the examination continued as follows:
Q. Can you now furnish the committee with a statement of the number of poles and tripods you have purchased, of whom purchased, and the prices paid; also a statement of the cost of the Sibley tents complete?
A. Yes, sir. I hand you a paper containing the statement you desire.
The paper was as follows:
---
Purchases by Lieut. Col. G. H. Crosman, deputy quartermaster general, of tripods for sibley tents, of malleable iron, and of tents complete, including chains, &c.
1861
Sept. 25, H. Simons..for tripods, poles, bands, and gudgeons, complete..10,000@ $3.40
Do............Do.....L. B. M. Dolby..............2,000@$3.50
Do............Do.....W. P. Wilstach & Co.....2,000@$3.50
Sept. 27, Do.....Esler & Bros.................2,000@$3.50
Sept. 30, Do.....Charles S. Close...........2,000@$3.50
Oct. 1, Do.....Henry Simons...............1,000@$3.40
Nov. 29, Do.....L. B. M. Dolby.................736@$3.40
Oct. 1, L. B. M. Dolby....for poles.....1,3000@$.70
Oct. 14, H. S. McComb...for Sibley tents, complete....3500@$43.80
Total number of tripods and poles...23,236
In all orders given for the above tripods it was particularly specified: "Top, to be malleable iron; legs, best charcoal bloom iron, and the pole of seasoned white pine.
The price paid by Col. Charles Thomas, assistant quartermaster general, United States army, March 18, 1859, the last purchase previous to the above, to Simons, Coleman & Co., was $4.25.
---
Q. I see by this statement that on September 25, 1861, Dolby furnished 2,000 at $3.50, and on Nov. 29th, 736 at $3.40. How is that difference in price explained?
A. I found out that I could get them less than the first price, and when I ascertained that I would not give him any more at $3.50.
Q. You have read the testimony of Mr. Dolby. What explanation is there of the fact of his receiving from you ninety-four cents more for tent-poles and tripods than he offered to make them for in New York?
A. I have no explanation to make. It is a matter I know nothing about. I knew nothing about his bid to Col. Vinton until several months after it was made.
Q. You had not been advised in any manner, officially or otherwise, of the bids which had been put in at New York?
A. No, sir; not in relation to tents and poles. Indeed, I did not know that he had advertised for tents.
Q. What is the practice of the quartermaster's department in regard to such matters; are they in correspondence with each other?
A. The quartermaster's department was organized under a very different system from that which is prevailing now. The present is a new state of things. Before the war broke out we never had a depot of clothing except in Philadelphia. The different quartermasters have not been in the habit of sending their bids to each other; but it is necessary that they should do so now, especially in reference to clothing and equipments, and that they should know what each other are doing; what every one has on hand, and the quartermaster general should know what all has on hand. There ought to be but one head for purchasing all articles of a particular description. The effect of sending five or six government agents into market to buy the same article is destructive of the public credit, and compels you to pay more money for the same goods, as well as to pay more agents.
Q. What has been the consequence in reference to tent poles and tripods, of not having such a correspondence between the different quartermasters?
A. In this particular case it resulted in my having to pay more than I otherwise should have paid.
Q. What is the difference?
A. The difference between the lowest bid made to Col. Vinton and the price I paid. I referred to my books and found what my predecessor had been paying for the same articles, and as I got them at one dollar less, I thought I had made a very good bargain. If I had known what offer had been made to Col. Vinton I should not have paid more than that, and should have got it done as much as less as possible.
Q. Would it not be for the interest of the government to have bids made at the different places of letting, communicated immediately to the quartermasters at other places?
A. Certainly, if you do not adopt the better policy of one purchaser.
Q. If it were a regulation of the department that you, for instance, should send the bids made for these various articles at your depot, to the corresponding quartermasters at New York, Boston, and Cincinnati; would it not be of very great advantage to those men if they had contracts to make for the same articles?
A. Certainly; and I have suggested to the quartermaster general the idea that we should act in concert with each other so that each one may know not only what the others buy, but what each one has to spare.
Q. If this system of communication between the different quartermasters, of which you have spoken, had prevailed heretofore, you think a large amount of money would have been saved in this very transaction?
A. that was my opinion. I believed so then, and I believe so now. I calculated the time it would take to make the advertisement, examine the bids, award and make the contract, and have the articles made. It was late September when I received the order. The latter part of October is cold, and these tents were wanted everywhere in the mountains of Virginia. the troops were suffering the want of tents, and it was my duty to supply the army promptly. I did not want the army to say that I, an old soldier, was here and the army was suffering through my delay.
Q. Has the government a large depot here for army clothing?
A. A very large depot-the largest in the United States, of which I have sole charge.
Q. What amount of material or of clothing have you on hand at the present time; what is the character; by whom has it been made, and by whom inspected?
A. I have a very large amount of clothing; enough, I suppose, to equip 200,000 men for three or four months, perhaps longer. I have also a large amount of material which is unmade, and which I am not making up now, because they have not drawn from my depot largely of late. Of some articles I have enough for double that number of men for that length of time, as for instance, shirts, drawers, stockings, and shoes, form essential articles, which I keep in larger quantities than anything else. I have 600,000 pairs of drawers, as one item; some 320,000 shirts; and some 300,000 boots and shoes. Those are essential articles which it will never do to be without; we must always have them on hand. A very considerable quantity the clothing I have on hand is of the regular army standard fabric. All the materials i made up are of that class; but there is in the depot a considerable supply of what is called irregular clothing, made up of black doeskin cassimere, dark gray cloth, and some satinets, which were bought at a time when the army standard cloths could not be had, or when what were in the market were held at enormous prices. the clothing has been chiefly made by contractors, while a considerable quantity has been made here under the superintendence of the regular officer of the arsenal. I do not remember the names of all the inspectors, but the chief inspector was Mr. Kerne, who was appointed by the Secretary of War, Mr. Cameron. He and his assistants inspected the clothing.
Q. Were the assistants appointed by the secretary of War?
A. I think all but one or two. The clerks even were appointed by him.
Q. Is it the usual course for the Secretary of War to make these appointments himself, or is it usual for the quartermaster, who is himself responsible to his superiors, to make the selection of his own agents?
A. I should say in reply to that question, that up to the period when I first came here, after the Mexican war, in 1848, it was not the usual or customary for the Secretary of war to make those appointments; that they had always been made by the officer in charge here. But about that time, or shortly afterwards, upon the election of a President, there was a general turning out of officers, and new appointments by the President. The same thing has occurred since upon every new election of President; and since that time I may say that it has been customary for the secretaries to appoint most of the officers, even those having salaries as small as $800.00, and from that up. Inspectors of shoes, of leather, the chief cutter, and even superintendents, have been turned out and other appointed. It has been a political machine to reward political favorites. I have had men imposed upon me in confidential positions, in whom I have had no choice, and whom I would not have retained have I had had the power to remove them. I had no such power until the present Secretary of War, Mr. Stanton, gave it to me.
Q. What has been the consequences of this method of appointing officers for you?
A. A constant loss to the United States in every case where it has been done. Loss has been liable to be incurred, and has been incurred, to my knowledge. I know one man, appointed several years ago, as chief cutter, who kept a grog-shop, and when garrison flags had to be cut, worth $40 a piece, he spoiled a large amount of them. This arose from his entire incompetency.
Q. Has there been any recent examination of your department in regard to its concerns? If so, state what it has been.
A. There has been a very general and particular examination into the operation of the arsenal, and of the manner in which business is conducted here. This was done by Messrs. Covode and Odell, of the House of representatives, who were here for two or three days. they went through the arsenal with me, and examined the manner in which business was conducted, and witnessed themselves the incompetency of the chief inspector, Mr. Kerne, who condemned, just before they arrived, a lot of blankets which were perfectly good, and, within the same hour, passed another lot of blankets which were good for nothing. They saw the blankets themselves immediately after, and heard the facts related, which occurred within an hour.
Q. What were the circumstances connected with the acceptance and rejection of these blankets?
A. It happened as these two gentlemen and myself were leaving the arsenal, two loads of blankets drove into the yard. As I had been showing them everything in the arsenal, I called out to the drayman and told him to bring me one of those blankets. He did so, and I handed it to Messrs. Covode and Odell, who pronounced it immediately to be a shoddy blanket, as I did myself. Mr. Covode pulled out of it a piece of an old nightcap, which had happened to escape being chopped up fine. It was an inch and a half long. We called Kerne up, the very inspector that had passed them as good, and I questioned him in the presence of these two gentlemen. I asked him if he had passed those blankets as fulfilling the army requirement. He said he had. What is the matter with them, he asked. This is the matter with them, said Mr. Covode, as he put his finger right through the blanket.
Q. Did the inspector look at all of them?
A. No, sir. We then sent for an armful of them and examined them. They were all shoddy blankets. I then went with those two gentlemen to the place where blankets were inspected. On arriving there we saw many other blankets of the same description, which Kerne had passed as good, and which he himself, being present, admitted that he had passed as good. We then saw a large pile of blankets, I do not know how many hundreds, which he had rejected and which were being sent away. these two gentlemen, my two inspectors, and myself examined them, and we all five pronounced them good blankets, so far as we could judge. We called Kerne up and inquired why he had rejected them. He admitted that he had rejected them. I asked him to point out the defects. He could not, and did not do it, but only said that he did not like them. We all questioned him in various ways, and the only answer we could get was that he did not like them.
Q. How do you account for this action of Inspector Kerne?
A. By his utter incompetency. I do not presume to impugn his integrity, for I had no information which would justify my doing so, but from his manner, and the character he sustained here, I was forced to believe he was entirely incompetent for his position.
Q. By whom was he appointed?
A. By the then Secretary of War, Mr. Cameron.
Q. Is Mr. Kerne still in that position?
A. No, sir; I dismissed him instantly. I had a written letter of discharge two days before those gentlemen arrived here, but at the request of his friends, one or two of the most prominent men in this city, I had consented to make a re-examination of the facts which has been reported to me, to see if I had erred in my conclusions, and on this very Monday morning on which these gentlemen arrived here I had sent for Kerne and offered him the benefit of an umpirage on what had occurred. We agreed that the matter should be left to two or three contractors, or respectable merchants of Philadelphia, to say, whether he was right, or I was right; that is to say, whether his judgment had erred in passing goods which ought not to have been passed, or whether I was right in saying that he ought to be discharged for doing what he had done. The arrival of those two gentlemen, and the occurrence of the matters which I have related, avoided the necessity of carrying out that arrangement. After the gentlemen left I went to my office and discharged Kerns immediately.
Q. is the position of inspector an important one?
A. It is of the utmost importance, as will be seen from the fact that the disbursing officer pays out the public money upon the certificate of the inspector. The printed certificate upon the voucher of the articles purchased sets out the quantity purchased, the prices paid, and the date of the delivery of the goods. The inspector's certificate essentially reads" I certify that I have examined such and such goods, and found them equal to the sample or standard by which they were purchased," and his name is signed to it. Below that is the receipt of the storekeeper, stating that he had received on a certain day so many articles of such a description, &c. that certificate and that receipt constitute the money voucher upon which the contractor was paid.
Q. Not being able to attend to these matters personally, of course you have to rely on these inspectors.
A. As a matter of course; from necessity it must be so.
Q. It is vastly important, then, to the public interest that none but men of the highest skill, honesty, and capacity should be appointed inspectors?
A. Certainly it is of vital importance, and always has been. I am greatly in hopes that this occurrence will put an end to such a method of appointing inspectors; it has been going on ever since 1848.
Q. Did you make an investigation, also, in regard to manufactured goods?
A. Yes, sir; the same result was found upon inspection of the made-up clothing, and I am now identifying, as far as possible to do so, the owners of those goods.
Q. Is there any difficulty in making such identification?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the difficulty?
A. In the early stages of this matter, and when goods were coming in here rapidly, they were inspected by Kerne and his assistants and thrown in a pile, and in some instances, having no marks upon them, it has been difficult if not impossible to trace them to the owners. Wherever I have been able to trace them to the contractors (and that is the order now to all the inspectors and clerks employed in the arsenal), I have thrown them upon their hands, and refuse to pay for them, the contractors, however, always having the privilege of replacing them with good, sound goods.
Q. Can you furnish the committee with a statement of the amount of this irregular clothing on hand now, and which are not adapted for army use. I can in a few days.
The following statement was subsequently furnished by the witness:
Army Clothing and Equipage Office
Philadelphia, April 4, 1862
Sir: I have to acknowledge the receipt of a letter from Theodore F. Andrews, clerk of committee, asking the amount and character of irregular clothing on hand at this department, and have the honor to report:
There is on hand at the Schuylkill arsenal the following irregular clothing, viz:
40,611 uniform coats
69,142 great coats
185,216 pair trousers
708 jackets
I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
G. H. Crosman,
Deputy Quartermaster General
Hon. E. B. Washburne,
Chairman Com. of Gov't Contracts, Washington, D. C.
Q. From you long experience and your knowledge in reference to articles of this kind, what in your judgment would be the best manner for the government to dispose of them?
A. I think the best mode would be, in the first place, to issue them to prisoners of war, if they are to be clothed by the government, and also to the negroes. That would be the first disposition to be made of them; and then they might be issued to prisoners of the army-our own men in confinement for offences. After that I would sell them in small parcels at various points and at suitable seasons, so as not to put too many upon the market at one time or at one place.
Q. Is the value of these articles diminished by keeping them?
A. I think not. They are kept with great care, and I do not think they will deteriorate. In reference to the depreciation of price, it is the opinion of merchants here that all the goods I have bought, will sell to-day for more than I paid for them, and the cotton goods would bring more than double the price.
Q. What are those cotton goods?
A. Jeans, such as are used for bed-ticking, cotton flannel for drawers, and seven-eighths drilling for linings. I have a large supply of those on hand. Some articles which I have paid ten cents for sell in the market 21 1/2 and 22 cents.
Q. What is your opinion as to the comparative merits of sewed and pegged shoes for army use?
A. For spring and winter use I prefer the pegged shoe. I bought some 46,000 pairs of them, apparently very good, at $1.25 to $1.30 a pair, intending them for General Banks division of the army; but some of them got to Washington, instead of going to General Bank's column, which they were bought for, and I got rapped over the knuckles for buying, for the quartermaster general did not approve of it.
Q. From your own experience in the army, and as quartermaster, taking into consideration the difference in the cost of pegged shoes and sewed shoes, and taking into consideration also the different seasons, which, in your judgment, is the best for the army?
A. The pegged shoes. I had rather have them at the same price. The British army in canada use nothing else. the French army to-day use nothing else. I could have saved the government hundreds of thousands of dollars if they allowed me to purchase pegged shoes.
End of Crosman testimony
With regards,
John
Jno. Sarver
Cin. O.