NORFOLK NAVY YARD

Marcus W. Robbins, Historian & Archivist
Copyright. All rights reserved.

Birth of the Gosport Yard & into the 19th Century

Books & Publications:
Note: Numbers in brackets indicate page numbers of the original document.

27th Congress, Doc. No. 205, Ho. of Reps.
2d Session.

NAVY YARD, NORFOLK.

LETTER
from
THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY,
TRANSMITTING
Reports of the Commissioner appointed to make an investigation at the Gosport Navy Yard, &c.

March 4, 1842.
Referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

May 5, 1842.
Committee discharged, laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.

* * * * * *

CONTINUATION (pp. 49 - 97)

[49] TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. MOORE.

Question. You have stated that you took notes of Mr. Moore's absence. Will you please state why you were thus particular?

Answer. I had had a personal altercation with Mr. Moore, and he had threatened to discharge me. Anticipating that I might be discharged, I determined to be prepared to defend myself in the public prints, and therefore took the notes I speak of.

Question. Do you not entertain, and have you not expressed hostile feelings towards Mr. Moore, in consequence of the altercation which passed between you?

[This question is excepted to by the commissioner.]

Answer. I decline answering.

JAMES K. PLANT.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 2, 1841.

Answers of Newton Armistead, examined in the case of Merritt Moore,
master gun carriage maker.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY THE COMMISSIONER.

Question. Have you worked in the gun carriage maker's department, and how long since?

Answer. It is about two years since I worked in that department.

Question. Did you assist in making any trucks for the gun carriages for the steamer Poinsett?

Answer. I worked on part of said trucks.

Question. Were any of said trucks condemned, or complaint made of their not being of proper size?

Answer. I know of no complaint having been made by the officers of the Poinsett. Mr. Moore told me to get out a set, and I did so; he afterwards complained that they were too small. I produced the paper pattern that he furnished, to get them out by, and it was found that the trucks were an inch larger than the pattern, and had to be reduced by turning.

As to the other specifications against Mr. Moore, which have been read to me, I know nothing.

NEWTON ARMISTEAD.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 2, 1841.

Answers of Nathaniel Hosier, examined in the case of Merritt Moore,
master gun carriage maker.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY THE COMMISSIONER.

Question. In what department and in what capacity are you employed?

Answer. In the ship carpenter's, as a journeyman.

Question. Did you ever have occasion to go to the gun carriage maker's department, to get cogs?

Answer. I had.

Question. For what vessel were they wanted?

Answer. The sloop of war Vandalia.

Question. Was there any delay in procuring them?

[50] Answer. The turners in the gun carriage maker's shop were engaged upon some other job at the time; but Mr. Gleason, the foreman, stopped that job, and set them to turning the cogs for me.

Question. Had you to go more than once for the cogs?

Answer. Only once.

Question. Were any carpenters delayed in their work on the Vandalia, by waiting for the cogs?

Answer. Four carpenters were delayed from two to three hours; but were not idle, as they were employed on other work.

Question. When did this take place?

Answer. Some time last fall.

NATHANIEL HOSIER his x mark.

Witness: J. A. HAZARD PEARCE.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 2, 1841.

Answers of William Gleason, examined on behalf of Merritt Moore,
master gun carriage maker.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. MOORE.

Question. In what department and in what capacity are you employed:

Answer. As foreman in the gun carriage maker's; to which is added the business of block and pump making.

Question. How long have you been employed in that department?

Answer. Since February, 1832. From October, 1837, until January, 1840, I acted as second foreman , and since January, 1840, as principal or only foreman.

Question. Do you know of my unnecessarily absenting myself from duty, or has any delay of the work in my department occurred in consequence of my absence?

Answer. I do not. When you were absent, from sickness, you have sent for me to make it known, and I have reported it to the commander or lieutenant of the yard; and if you were absent in other parts of the yard, on duty, I did not think it necessary to make it known to the workmen of the shop.

Question. Do you know of my having been reported to Commodore Warrington, by the workmen in my department, and the cause of my being so reported?

Answer. I have heard the men complain of Mr. Moore's being so constantly in the shop, and that they could not do work enough to satisfy him; also, that they contemplated reporting him to the Commodore; but whether they did so or not, I cannot say.

Question. Be pleased to state what you know concerning a paper circulated on the 23d July, 1840, for the signatures of the workmen, and what was the object of that paper?

Answer. On all public occasions, when it is supposed that the workmen wish to leave off work for part of a day, it is customary to ascertain who wish to go and who wish to stay. On the occasion referred to, the paper was handed round as usual, that the men's time might be checked by the master workman, and for no other purpose. No compulsion was resorted to to induce them to stay or go.

[51] Question. Since Mr. Moore has been at the head of the department, how many gun carriages have been made? Have any of them been returned, condemned, or complained of?

Answer. Many carriages have been made for vessels fitting out here, and none of them condemned or complained of, that I know.

Question. Do you know Joseph Bushell? Was he ever employed in the gun carriage maker's department? Was he discharged therefrom, and why? And have you ever heard him express any opinions unfriendly to me?

Answer. I do know Joseph Bushell. He was once employed in the gun carriage maker's department, and was discharged when there was a general reduction of the force in the yard. I have since heard him utter hostile sentiments towards you, and curse you.

Question. Do you know James K. Plant, now employed as turner in the gun carriage maker's department?

Answer. I do.

Question. Do you know of any altercation that occurred between Mr. Plant and myself? When did it take place, and what were the circumstances of that altercation?

Answer. I know nothing of the altercation myself, as I was in the spar shed when it occurred, although I have heard it related by both parties. You sent for me immediately, and stated that you had censured Plant for neglecting his work, when the words or quarrel ensued. I have frequently since heard Plant indulge in malignant and revengeful expressions towards you, and I undertook to expostulate with him for it, and convince him that he was wrong to indulge such feelings, as I thought you entertained none such towards him. Plant replied, that he could not help it. Prior to the dispute, I had warned Plant that you had complained of his neglecting work, and were watching him.

Question. Be pleased to state what you know respecting some pumps made by me for the use of the yard, which were afterwards taken up and repaired?

Answer. I am a pump and block maker by trade, and there is only one pump in the yard which I have not made or assisted in. I got out the timber for these pumps, which was the best that could be found in the yard. The pumps are for watering the vessels, and are unusually high above ground, and exposed to the weather, which will crack the best timber that can be used. They were taken up, after having been used about fifteen months, the cracks caulked, strips of lead nailed over the cracks, and the parts above ground coated with tar; after which, they were covered with felt, and a shearing of plank outside of the whole. I consider them in good order, and that they will last a long while. I have calculated the cost of repairs, and find that two and a half days' work only was expended on each, so that it is impossible, after adding the cost of materials, it could amount to any thing like one hundred dollars. I have made no less than three sets of pumps for the same well since I have been in the yard.

WM. GLEASON.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 3, 1841.

[52] Answers of Michael King, examined on behalf of Merritt Moore,
master gun carriage maker.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. MOORE.

Question. In what department, for how long a period, and in what capacity, have you been employed?

Answer. In the gun carriage maker's, for the last fourteen years, as a journeyman.

Question. Have you ever found me deficient or inattentive in the discharge of my duties?

Answer. I have not, but quite the reverse.

Question. Have you ever known any gun carriages to be returned or complained of, for being improperly made?

Answer. I have not.

Question. Do you know Joseph Bushell, once employed in the gun carriage maker's department, and have you ever heard him express feelings unfriendly to me?

Answer. I know him, and have heard him repeatedly use expressions unfriendly to you.

Question. As you have been employed in the gun carriage maker's department fourteen years, you must have served under former master workmen. Has the work been as well executed since I took charge of it as before?

Answer. It has been; and, if any thing, better, and more of it.

MICHAEL KING.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 3, 1841.

Answers of George T. Guy, examined on behalf of Merritt Moore,
master gun carriage maker.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. MOORE.

Question. In what department, how long, and in what capacity, have you been employed?

Answer. In the gun carriage maker's, as a journeyman, about three years.

Question. Have you ever found me inattentive to my duties, negligent of or incapable of discharging them?

Answer. I have not.

Question. Have you ever known me to compel the men in my department to quit work against their will?

Answer. I have not.

Question. Do you know James K. Plant?

Answer. I do.

Question. Do you know of any altercation having taken place between Mr. Plant and myself?

Answer. I do not.

Question. Have you ever heard Mr. Plant express unfriendly feelings towards me?

Answer. I have.

Question. On what occasion?

[53] Answer. About a week since, in passing out of the yard with Mr. Plant, some conversation took place between us respecting the complaints alleged against you. I inquired of him who had made the complaints, and he replied, "A Mr. John Body, and a Mr. J. C. Wintry." Mr. Plant further said, that you had charged him with making the complaints, but that he would not consent to be charged without having satisfaction. He said that all he had done he did in self defence.

GEORGE T. GUY.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 3, 1841.

Answers of Marit Parsons, examined on behalf of Merritt Moore,
master gun carriage maker.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. MOORE.

Question. In what department, in what capacity, and how long, have you been employed in this yard?

Answer. In the gun carriage maker's, as a journeyman, upwards of 18 years.

Question. Have you ever known me to be inattentive to my duties, or deficient in capacity for the discharge of them?

Answer. I have not. On the contrary, the workmen in your department have found fault with you for being too strict.

Question. Have you ever known work made in the gun carriage maker's department to be returned, or complained of as not being well or properly made?

Answer. I have not.

MARIT PARSONS.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 3, 1841.

Answers of Dr. Wm. J. Cocke, of Portsmouth, examined on behalf of Merritt Moore,
master gun carriage maker.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. MOORE.

Question. Will you be pleased to state what you know respecting Joshua Barnes, a witness summoned before the commissioner, on behalf of the complaints alleged against me?

Answer. Joshua Barnes hired a negro woman of mine for the year 1840, and gave bond for the amount of wages. About Christmas he called upon me, and made such representations as induced me, by operating on my feelings, to give up his bond for five dollars less than the amount due. He represented that he had been sick, and absent from work much of the year; that he had a doctor's bill of about $60 to pay, was about to leave this place for New York, and had borrowed the money to pay his bond. I afterwards ascertained that his representations were not true, as far as I have good reasons to believe; and, moreover, that he had boasted to an acquaintance of his having got the bond from me, and not caring whether the negro was clothed or not.

WM. J. COCKE.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, May 31, 1841.

[54] Answers of Dr. Francis S. Campos, examined on behalf of Merritt Moore,
master gun carriage maker.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. MOORE.

Question. Have you attended on me, as my physician?

Answer. I have.

Question. Have I been under your care at any time during the last two years, and for how long a time?

Answer. You have, and during the year 1839 nearly the whole time. You have had attacks every spring and fall, since I attended you. Last August you were confined to your bed, as near as I can recollect, about a week.

Question. Was my indisposition such as to render it prudent for me to refrain from business in the morning before breakfast?

Answer. It was. You labor under a pulmonary affection, which is occasionally attended with spitting of blood, and it requires care and prudence on your part.

FRANCIS S. CAMPOS.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 3, 1841.

STATE OF VIRGINIA, county of Norfolk, sct:

I, John Nash, a justice of the peace in and for the county of Norfolk aforesaid, in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify that Francis S. Campos this day personally appeared before me, in my said county, and made oath, in due form of law, that the answers given to the interrogatories propounded to him, and which are contained above, are true and correct.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this seventeenth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and forty-one.

JOHN NASH, J. P. [SEAL.]

STATE OF VIRGINIA, county of Norfolk, sct:

I, John Nash, a justice of the peace in and for the county of Norfolk aforesaid, in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify that Joseph Bushell, Joshua N. Barnes, Samuel Harwood, James K. Plant, Uriah Cutherell, Jonathan Hall, David Edwards, Joseph Culpeper, John Pritchard, Newton Armistead, Nathaniel Hosier, William Gleason, Michael King, George T. Guy, Marit Parsons, and William J. Cocke, this day personally appeared before me, in my said county, and severally made oath, in due form of law, that the answers given to the interrogatories propounded to them, and which are contained in the sheets of paper signed by their names, respectively, are true and correct.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this fifteenth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and forty-one.

JOHN NASH, J. P. [SEAL.]

Interrogatory propounded by Merritt Moore, master gun carriage maker,
United States navy yard, Norfolk, Va., to Commander H. N. Page and
Lieutenant A. B. Pinkham, of the United States navy.

Question. Be pleased to state what you know relative to Merritt [55] Moore's capacity and attention to the discharge of his duties, as master gun carriage maker in this yard?

Answer. From what we know of Mr. Moore, we think him fully competent to discharge the duties of master gun carriage maker, and that he has thus far discharged them satisfactorily. The work that has been performed under his directions fully tests the attention he has paid to his business.

HUGH N. PAGE, Commander.
A. B. PINKHAM, Lieutenant.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 3, 1841.

* * * * * *

GOSPORT NAVY YARD, June 17, 1841.

Sir: Charges having been preferred against me, before your commissioner, B. Homans, Esq., by a certain Joseph Bushell, the said charges not only resting on the knowledge of said Bushell, but to be sustained by the evidence of others.

It will appear, by evidence in this cause filed, that the said Bushell is a discharged man from the yard, and entertaining towards me the most malignant feelings. J. K. Plant, also a witness, is by said testimony, and by his refusal to answer my question before the commissioner, also proven to be influenced by unfriendly feelings, emanating from a difference that originated in my discharge of duty in the department in which I am employed. I will not trespass on your time by any comment on said testimony, as I deem it unnecessary, but content myself with referring you to the said testimony, and the letters of Commodore Shubrick, Captains Page, Skinner, McCauley, and others, herewith filed, and numbered from 1 to 7, inclusive. I also most respectfully refer you to Commodore L. Warrington, as to the persons, and the nature of their charges preferred against me.

I am, sir, most respectfully, your obedient servant,

M. MOORE.

Hon. GEORGE E. BADGER, Secretary of the Navy of the U. S.

* * * * * *

No. 1.

We, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the pumps referred to in the charges against Mr. Merritt Moore, and the manner in which they were repaired, by being sheathed, in our opinion answer a good purpose, and have saved the expense of boring out and making new ones.

Given under our hands, this 28th day of May, 1841.

HUGH N. PAGE, Commander.
A. B. PINKHAM, Lieutenant.
J. QUIN, Master.

* * * * * *

No. 2.

This is to certify that Mr. Merritt Moore has frequently had turners' work executed for my department, and which I do not hesitate to say [56] was always done in a manner perfectly satisfactory to me, and answered well the purposes intended.

Given under my hand.

JAMES A. WILLIAMS, Master ship joiner.

GOSPORT NAVY YARD, May 28, 1841.

* * * * * *

No. 3.

This is to certify that Mr. Moore has frequently and repeatedly had block work executed for this department, which has, at all times, given me perfect satisfaction, and answered well the purposes for which said work was intended.

Given under my hand.

JOHN FREEMAN, Acting Master U. S. Navy.

May 28, 1841.

* * * * * *

No. 4. The block maker's department of this yard is frequently necessarily associated with the mast and spar maker's department, in their respective duties, and, with pleasure, I hereby certify that I have always found the utmost readiness, on the part of Mr. Merritt Moore, master gun carriage and block maker of this yard, to execute with despatch the public work; and I emphatically state it has always been finished in a workmanlike and faithful manner.

JOHN B. DAVIS, Master mast and spar maker.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, GOSPORT, May 28, 1841.

* * * * * *

No. 5.

NAVY YARD, GOSPORT, VA., June 5, 1841.

Sir: In answer to your note of this morning, I have no hesitation in stating my opinion of your full competency to discharge your duties as master gun carriage builder, of this yard; and that, since I have commanded this yard, those duties have been discharged to my satisfaction.

I am, respectfully, &c.

W. BRANFORD SHUBRICK.

Mr. M. MOORE.

* * * * * *

No. 6.

U. S. RECEIVING SHIP PENNSYLVANIA,
Norfolk, May 31, 1841.

Sir: The gun carriages made at the navy yard, Gosport, under your supervision, for the United States ship Pennsylvania, appear to be well made, and well adapted to the guns for which they were intended. During [57] the time you were on board, superintending the alteration of certain gun carriages which came from Philadelphia, you were diligent and attentive to your duty.

I am, respectfully, your obedient servant,

CHARLES W. SKINNER, Captain.

Mr. MERRITT MOORE, Navy Yard, Gosport, Va.

* * * * * *

No. 7.

U. S. SHIP DELAWARE, NORFOLK, June 4, 1841.

Sir: The carriages made by you for the Paixhan guns of this ship are, so far as I am enabled to judge, equal, in point of workmanship, to any gun carriages constructed for the service.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

C. S. McCAULEY, Captain.

Mr. MERRITT MOORE, Gun carriage maker, Gosport Navy Yard.

* * * * * *

F.

Summary of the complaints alleged against John Hobday, master painter in the
United States navy yard at Norfolk, Va.

First. Hiring from Mr. Wills Cowper, of Portsmouth, two negro men, employing them in the navy yard as public laborers, and requiring for his own use one-half of their wages, which was paid for several months. When Mr. Cowper refused to submit to the payment any longer, the negroes were discharged.

Second. Receiving from John Perry, a journeyman formerly employed in his department, a portion of his wages.

Third. Receiving from Marshall Hutchinson, a journeyman formerly employed in his department, a portion of his wages.

Fourth. Receiving from John Shannon, a journeyman now employed in his department, a portion of his wages.

Fifth. Receiving from William Patrick, a journeyman now employed in his department, a portion of his wages.

Names of witnesses.

Wills Cowper, John Shannon, John Perry, William Patrick, Marshall Hutchinson, Joseph M. Miles.

Examination fixed for Tuesday, May 25, at 9 A. M. Postponed until Saturday, June 5, 9 A. M.

[58] Answers of William M. Patrick, examined in the case of John Hobday; master painter.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY THE COMMISSIONER.

Question. In what department and in what capacity are you employed?

Answer. In the painter's, as a journeyman.

Question. Has Mr. Hobday ever demanded or received from you any portion of your wages.

Answer. He has not.

Question. Do you know of your own knowledge whether Mr. Hobday has received from any journeyman in his department a portion of his wages?

Answer. I do not.

WM. M. PATRICK, his + mark.

Witness: L. GAYLE.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 18, 1841.

Answer of John Shannon, examined in the case of John Hobday, master painter.

TO INTERROGRATORY BY THE COMMISSIONER.

Question. In what department and in what capacity are you employed?

Answer. In the painter's, as an apprentice.

The commissioner deems it unnecessary to interrogate this witness any further.

JOHN SHANNON, his + mark.

Witness: L. GAYLE.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 18, 1841.

STATE OF VIRGINIA, county of Norfolk, sct:

I, John Nash, a justice of the peace in and for the county of Norfolk aforesaid, in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify that William M. Patrick and John Shannon this day personally appeared before me, in my said county, and severally made oath, in due form of law, that the answers given to the interrogatories propounded to them, and which are contained on this sheet of paper, are true and correct.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this eighteenth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and forty-one.

JOHN NASH, J. P. [SEAL.]

* * * * * *

Sir: Charges having been preferred to your Department against me, by John N. Murdaugh, of this place, that I was a political partisan, and had used blasphemous language applicable to the late President of the United States, that I was a blackguard, &c.

As to the first and second charges, I deny them, unequivocally, and place my assertion in opposition to Mr, Murdaugh's, and feel no fears as to the [59] result, where we are both known. Nor do I, sir, fear the comparison in your judgment, by circumstances, and the evidence and papers filed herewith. Mr. Murdaugh most insidiously endeavors to enlist your feelings against me, by first accusing me of blasphemy, and then recommending a Mr. Cowper, as my successor, who, he gravely asserts, is a very religious man. Such pitiful attempts need no comment. As to my being a blackguard, that is a direct slander, not only on me, but my superiors in command. That I was not formerly, I refer you to the letters of the President of the United States, Mr. A. Stevenson, minister to the Court of St. James, and others, herewith filed, and numbered from one to nine, inclusive; and that I am not at present, I refer you to the circumstance that I have been daily, for years past, under the eye of Commodore Lewis Warrington, as master painter in this yard. I only mention this as a circumstance to show the absurdity (using the mildest term) of Mr. Murdaugh's accusation; for I would not, nor do I believe there is a man in this community who would, for a moment think of sustaining his character, by certificates, against the bare assertions of Mr. John N. Murdaugh; nor do I now attempt recrimination, although Mr. Murdaugh ought to have remembered that he was speaking of an individual towards whom he had, for years, entertained the most unfriendly feelings, and which he knew full well were most heartily reciprocated on my part.

Since I have been employed in the yard, I have saved large sums to the Government, by preparing articles in my line of business, which were, before then, purchased at a great cost, and I believe are still at other yards. As to these matters, and all others in which I am implicated, I take the liberty of referring you to Commodore L. Warrington, to whom I have been known, as master painter, for sixteen years.

I am, sir, most respectfully, your most obedient servant,

JOHN HOBDAY.

Hon. GEORGE E. BADGER, Secretary of the Navy of the United States.

* * * * * *

U. S. NAVY YARD, GOSPORT, October 13, 1840.

Gentlemen: I, in relinquishing the command of this yard, deem it a duty, and I feel it a pleasure, to make known to the naval and civil officers of the establishment the gratification I have felt at the support I have uniformly received from all, the zealous discharge of the complicated and arduous duties by all, and the harmony and good will at all times manifested.

These considerations go far to convert the regret I feel at separation into pleasure; and with the hope that all may continue to enjoy health and prosperity, I take a friendly and affectionate leave.

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

L. WARRINGTON.

TO THE NAVAL AND CIVIL OFFICERS Of the U. S. Navy Nard, Gosport.

[60] PAINTER'S DEPARTMENT,
U. S. Navy Yard, Gosport, Va., May 20, 1841.

Having heard it reported that Mr. John Hobday, master mechanic of this department, has received a portion of the pay of the journeymen under his charge, for being retained or admitted in the yard, and also that he had exercised an undue political influence, the undersigned do freely and cheerfully state that, so far as their knowledge extends, they have never paid any thing themselves, or known any other journeyman (since discharged) to pay any thing; and, further, that he has never attempted to influence our political opinions in any manner.

James Wright, John Allen, Lawrence Barsaglini, Smith B. Parker, Peter D. Williams, George A. Barrow, John W. West, Thomas Pain, Wm. M. Patrick, James R. Nichols, William Clark, Jno. H. Pollard, John Singleton, Thomas Hobday, Marshall Hutcheson, Lewis Power, John Perry.

* * * * * *

GOSPORT NAVY YARD, May 24, 1841.

This is to certify that Mr. John Hobday, master painter of the United States navy yard, Gosport, Virginia, has never received nor required any money from me for the privilege of being employed in said yard; nor has he attempted to exert any undue political influence over me, at any time.

JOHN D. COOPER.

* * * * * *

G.

Summary of the complaints alleged against Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper at the United States navy yard, Norfolk, Virginia.

First. Making requisition for a large quantity of files, after they had been refused by the master blacksmith, and afterwards receiving them into store.

Second. Making requisition for a large quantity of brass or copper wire, not wanted for the public service.

Third. Making requisition for a large quantity of sheet tin, not wanted for the public service.

Fourth. Receiving into the public store sundry kegs of nails, which were damaged, and not fit for public use, said to have been bought at auction at a low price, and sold to the Government at a high price.

Fifth. General incompetency for the discharge of his duties.

Names of the witnesses.

L. W. Boutwell, clerk.
Nathaniel Manning, clerk.
[61 ] Henry Keeling, gunner.
William Richardson, overseer.
Matthew Denson, of Portsmouth.
Workmen in armorer's department, as to wire and tin.
John Linn, master boat builder, as to No. 4.
The master workmen in the yard, as to No. 5.

Special interrogatories propounded to sundry persons, by B. Homans, commissioner, &c., in the case of Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper, U. S. navy yard, Norfolk, Va.

First. In what capacity are you employed in this yard?

Second. Have you any knowledge of the circumstances attending the purchase of a quantity of files, on a recent occasion? If yea, be pleased to state them.

Third. Have you any knowledge of the circumstances attending the purchase of a quantity of brass or copper wire? If yea, be pleased to state them.

Fourth. Have you any knowledge of the circumstances attending the purchase of a quantity of sheet tin? If yea, be pleased to state them.

Fifth. Have you any knowledge of the circumstances attending the purchase of a quantity of nails, which were received into the public store in a damaged state, and not fit for public use? If yea, be pleased to state them.

B. HOMANS, Commissioner.

General interrogatories propounded to sundry persons by B. Homans, commissioner, &c., in the case of Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper at the U. S. navy yard, Norfolk, Va.

First. Do you know of any requisitions upon the naval storekeeper, for articles of any description, being sent to the navy agent at Norfolk, that those articles might be purchased, when the same could have been furnished at the time from the public store? If yea, be pleased to state what those articles were, by whom required, and when the purchase was ordered.

Second. Do you know of any instances in which articles have been offered for sale to the naval storekeeper, or at the navy yard, before any requisitions for them were made; and of requisitions being afterwards made to cover those or similar articles? If yea, be pleased to state them.

Third. Do you know of any instances in which a larger quantity of articles than the requisitions called for have been sent over to the navy yard, from Norfolk or elsewhere, for the purpose of being received into store? If yea, be pleased to state them; and, also, whether the surplus of articles so sent were or were not received into store on public account.

B. HOMANS, Commissioner.

Answers of Lewis W. Boutwell, examined in the case of Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper.

TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the first. As first clerk in the storekeeper's department.

To the second. In February, 1841, a requisition in due form was made for 77 gross of files, of various kinds and sizes, for "public stores," all of which have not yet been delivered.

[62] To the third. In March, 1841, forty bundles of brass wire, of eleven different sizes, and weighing 1,994 pounds, were received on account of "public stores," upon requisition made in due form.

To the fourth. Thirty-rive boxes of tin (viz: 20 of single, 10 of the largest size, and 5 of XX) were received on the same requisition with the brass wire.

To the fifth. I have no knowledge of any nails being received into store on public account, in a damaged state.

TO GENERAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the first. I have no knowledge of any such.

To the second. I have no knowledge of any.

To the third. In July, 1837, Mr. Linn, master boat builder, made a requisition for 6,000 pounds of copper nails, from 1-1/4 to 4 inches, for "general repairs," which were furnished by Mr. John Capron, of Norfolk, who, instead of sending 6,000 pounds, sent about 10,000 pounds. On or about the 8th August, 1837, Mr. Jordan made a requisition for the balance of these nails, from 30 to 6 penny, for "public stores."

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. JORDAN.

Question. Could the copper nails which Mr. Linn required have been used by any one else, he having signed a requisition for the same?

Answer. They could not.

Question. Were the nails which Mr. Linn required entered on the storekeeper's books as "expended" for the object for which they were required?

Answer. They were.

Question. Could not the nails which Mr. Jordan required for "public stores" have been expended for any of the usual purposes of the yard, upon the requisitions of the master workmen, or for public vessels?

Answer. They could.

Question. Have I not been very particular in refusing to receive a larger quantity of articles than were called for by requisition?

Answer. I have known instances in which you have objected to receive articles in this manner.

Question. Did not Mr. Eugene Higgins and myself once have a dispute, because I refused to receive about five hundred pounds of cheese more than the requisition called for?

Answer. There was such a dispute; but whether it arose from there being a larger quantity sent than called for, or because the cheese was condemned, I do not recollect.

Question. Have I ever held any conversation with you in relation to this investigation?

Answer. No.

L. W. BOUTWELL.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, May 29, 1841.

Answers of Nathaniel Manning, examined in the case of Merit Jordan, Esq, naval storekeeper.

TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the first. As second clerk to the naval storekeeper.

To the second, third, fourth, and fifth. I have none.

[63] TO GENERAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the first and second. I do not.

To the third. It frequently happens, and is indeed unavoidable, that a greater or smaller quantity of articles may be sent than are required, as it is difficult to ascertain the precise quantity before inspection or measurement. I do not recollect any instances of the delivery of a greater quantity of articles than was called for, or than would be necessary to cover the order, as nearly as practicable. If there be any, the books will show them.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. JORDAN.

Question. Were not the files, brass wire, and tin, spoken of in the special interrogatories, obtained in the usual way, upon requisitions, duly approved, for general supply, to be served out as occasion might require?

Answer. They were.

Question. On what particular duty are you engaged?

Answer. I assist Mr. Boutwell in keeping the books, and making out returns of all kinds, and we occupy an office together in the second story of the public store.

Question. Does not this duty require the unremitted attention of both of you?

Answer. It does.

Question. Have I not been very particular in refusing to receive a larger quantity of articles than were called for by requisition?

Answer. My occupation up stairs does not afford me an opportunity of obtaining information that would enable me to answer this question.

Question. Do you not recollect an instance in which a quantity of whiskey was sent to the public store, and refused?

Answer. I remember such a circumstance, but cannot state the quantity, or when or by whom furnished.

Question. Do you know of any instances in which I have favored, or shown a disposition to favor, any contractor, or person furnishing supplies for this yard, to the prejudice or injury of the Government?

Answer. I do not.

Question. Were you not employed, and how long, as assistant clerk in the navy store, previously to my appointment as storekeeper?

Answer. I was, for several years.

Question. Was there not a quantity of rusty nails condemned at the last annual survey, and sold at public auction in this yard, which had been in public store previously to my appointment?

Answer. There were from four to six kegs, which were in store when you took charge of it, condemned at the last annual survey, and sold about six weeks ago, at public auction.

Question. Have I ever held any conversation with you in relation to this investigation?

Answer. None.

NATHANIEL MANNING.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, May 29, 1841.

[64] Answers of William Richardson, examined in the case of Merit Jordan, Esq.,
naval storekeeper.

TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the first. In the storekeeper's, as an assistant.

To the second. A quantity of files, of various kinds and sizes, was recently received into store in the usual manner, upon a requisition duly approved, which requisition was based upon an estimate or memorandum of the number of files that would be wanted for a general supply during the year.

To the third. I stated to the storekeeper, once or twice, that we were in want of brass wire, as it was an article frequently called for. A requisition for it, I suppose, was made, as a quantity was lately received, and is now nearly all in store. Ships of war had sometimes gone to sea from this yard, without all the sizes of brass wire they wanted, because we could not supply it.

To the fourth. I have not.

To the fifth. I have not. There were some few kegs of damaged nails in the store, which had been here for years before Mr. Jordan was appointed storekeeper.

TO GENERAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the first. I do not know of any thing of note so ordered to be purchased. There may have been some articles in store, not on charge, brought on shore from vessels after a cruise, which the persons making the requisition would not receive.

To the second. I do not.

To the third. On this head I can have no knowledge, as I have nothing to do with the books. It is my business to receive the articles, and see that they correspond with the bills sent with them. When articles are sent to the store, the indent or order to purchase is not returned with them.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. JORDAN.

Question. Are you not the principal assistant in the store, whose duty it is to attend to the receipt and delivery of articles, and make report of the same to me?

Answer. I am.

Question. Are not all articles received into store subjected to inspection before a receipt for them is given?

Answer. They are.

Question. Did you ever know any articles to be received in a damaged state?

Answer. I never did.

Question. Have I not been devotedly attentive to my duties, in superintending the operations of the store, and in taking care of the public property?

Answer. You have, so far as my observation has extended and my ability will allow me to judge.

WILLIAM RICHARDSON.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, May 29, 1841.

[65] TO ADDITIONAL INTERROGATORIES BY MR. JORDAN.

Question. Is there not, in the public store, a room in the second story, fitted up with shelving, in which the assorted hardware kept on hand for daily use is arranged, so that any article that may be wanted can be easily found, and is not this room always kept locked?

Answer. Yes.

Question. Were you not attached to the navy store, as an assistant, before Matthew Denson was employed therein; and about how long?

Answer. I was, for several months.

Question. Were there in the public store any steelyards, other than those returned by public ships after a cruise; and which, it was supposed, would be objected to by the persons requiring those articles?

Answer. Not any, to my knowledge.

WILLIAM RICHARDSON.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 15, 1841.

Answers of Henry Keeling, examined in the case of Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper.

TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the first. I am a gunner in the navy, assigned to duty in the naval store, by Commodore Warrington.

To the second. I have none. There were some files received into store, but I cannot say in what way they were procured.

To the third. There was a quantity of brass wire received a short time since. Mr. Spratley, the master armorer, was called to inspect it, which he did. He picked out such sizes as the requisition called for, and they were taken. There were some bundles left over, which Mr. Jordan returned to the person who furnished the wire.

To the fourth. There were several boxes of tin received early in May, all of which is in store except two boxes. I know nothing about the purchase.

To the fifth. I have none.

TO GENERAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the first. I do not, except as to some pig lead, about five hundred pounds of which was lately ordered and delivered. To the second and third. I do not.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. JORDAN.

Question. When the brass wire and sheet tin were received, was there any of either of those articles on hand?

Answer. There was not. There had been many calls for brass wire, which we could not supply.

Question. When Mr. Spratley inspected, the brass wire, did he not advise me not to return the surplus, as it would be wanted?

Answer. He did; and told you that, as it was here, and not much in the way, you had better keep it; but you refused to keep it without the order of the commodore, and sent it back.

[66] Question. Where was the pig lead you speak of, when the 500 pounds were ordered to be purchased?

Answer. Part of it was in a locker, and part in the lower story, stowed away under some rigging; and all of it (about 1,000 pounds) out of sight.

HENRY KEELING, his x mark.

Witness: J. A. HAZARD PEARCE.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, May 29, 1841.

Answers of Matthew Denson, of Portsmouth, examined in the case of Merit Jordan, Esq.,
naval storekeeper.

SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the second, third, fourth, and fifth. I have none.

TO GENERAL INTERROGATORIES.

To the first. I recollect that some steelyards were ordered from the navy agent, when there were five or six pairs hanging up in the store; also, that some pig lead was purchased, when there was a quantity of it in the store.

To the second. None that I know of.

To the third. In 1839, some iron cut nails were sent to the store, in larger quantities than the requisition called for; those that were wanted were selected, and the rest laid aside. Not more than two or three weeks afterwards, another requisition was made, to cover the nails left at the store. I have no recollection of other particular instances in which any great excess of articles has been sent to the store.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. JORDAN.

[Mr. Jordan desires it to be stated on the record, that Mr. Denson at first refused to answer the cross-interrogatories propounded to him, but that he afterwards consented to do so, when the commissioner was requested to notice his refusal.]

Question. To whom did you apply for admission into the naval store, and what conversation occurred at the time?

Answer. I applied to Mr. Boutwell, your clerk, first, to yourself next, and to the commodore afterwards, at your suggestion. I told you that I had failed in business, had a large family, was out of employment, and was desirous to obtain a situation in the public store. To which you replied, that, if the commodore consented, you had no objection to take me into the store.

Question. In what business were you engaged when you failed?

Answer. I kept a public house.

Question. What duty did you perform in the public store?

Answer. I attended to the receipt and delivery of stores.

Question. Did you have any thing to do with keeping the books?

Answer. I had not.

Question. How long were you in the store?

Answer. Two years, two months, and three days.

Question. Have you ever said, in Portsmouth or elsewhere, that if I could be dismissed from the office of naval storekeeper you would illuminate your house and treat to wine?

[67] Answer. I did say, in February, 1841, that "when you were dismissed I would illuminate my end of the house, and have some decanters of liquor."

Question. Do you know what quantity of pig lead was on hand, referred to in your reply to the first general interrogatory?

Answer. I cannot state the quantity.

MATTHEW DENSON.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 1, 1841.

Answers of Thomas W. Jordan, examined on behalf of Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. JORDAN.

Question. In what department and in what capacity are you employed?

Answer. As assistant clerk in the naval store.

Question. How long have you been so employed, and what are your duties?

Answer. Nearly five years. I record all requisitions in the books; make out indents for purchases and orders for articles made in the yard; check and make out bills; record letters, and occasionally attend to the receipt and delivery of stores.

Question. Must not all requisitions be approved by the commandant, before an article can be delivered or required from the navy agent?

Answer. They must.

Question. Did I not, within the present year, hand you a memorandum, and inform you it was an estimate from Mr. Grice and Mr. Spratley, for block and sheet tin, zinc, and sheet lead; and did I not instruct you to make out a requisition accordingly, for "public stores?"

Answer. You did; and I made out the requisition conformably.

Question. Did not Mr. Spratley, master armorer, lately make out the estimate for brass wire, in your presence, for "public stores," and was the requisition made out accordingly?

Answer. He did; and the requisition was made out accordingly.

Question. When the wire was sent over to the store, did not Mr. Spratley examine it, and pronounce it good; and did he not advise me to keep eleven bundles, which had been sent, beyond the quantity required?

Answer He did; and said the eleven bundles would be wanted.

Question. Did I not send back the eleven bundles, and refuse to keep them?

Answer. You did.

Question. Was not the requisition for the files lately purchased, based upon former requisitions for similar supplies?

Answer. It was.

Question. Have you not frequently heard me refuse to take articles exceeding the requisition, unless by order of the commodore; and has it nol been invariably my custom to do so, unless the excess was small, and unavoidable?

Answer. Yes.

Question. What room in my office do you occupy?

Answer. The same as yourself.

Question. Are there not now in the public store eight casks of wrought iron nails, which have been there for some time, belonging to Messrs. Hig- [68] gins & Brother? Have I not refused to take these nails, and are they not now at their risk, and subject to their order?

Answer. Yes.

Question. Have you examined the books for the year 1839, to ascertain what quantity of iron cut nails were required for "public stores?" If yea, what was the quantity received over that required?

Answer. I have; and the whole excess amounts to about 600 lbs., which were received upon the original requisition.

Question. Do the books not show, in February, 1838, a requisition, and the receipt for public stores, of a larger quantity of files than the one made in February, 1841, for the same purpose?

Answer. They do; three gross and ten dozen more in 1838 than in 1841.

Question. Do the books not show other requisitions for the same articles and the same purpose, though not so large, during the year 1839?

Answer. They do.

Question. Has any pig lead been received into the public store during the present year?

Answer. There has not; but some pig tin was received on a requisition made in February.

Question. Has there not been a requisition made for pig lead (one thousand pounds) for the United States ship Delaware, lately made, and marked to be delivered from that in store?

Answer. There has.

THOMAS W. JORDAN.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 15, 1841.

Answers of John Capron, of Norfolk, examined on behalf of Merit Jordan, Esq.,
naval storekeeper.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. JORDAN.

Question. Have you not frequently furnished articles, by authority of the navy agent at Norfolk, for the use of this yard?

Answer. I have.

Question. Have I not been very particular in refusing to receive a larger quantity of articles than the requisitions called for, without the authority of the commandant of the yard? And have you not yourself applied to the commandant to take those articles, on public account?

Answer. Whenever the surplus was of trifling amount, say such as was unavoidable in sending the exact quantity called for, it was always received by you, as was the practice with your predecessor, Mr. Galt. But when the surplus amounted in cost to thirty or forty dollars or more, it has been invariably the practice of both to refer the matter to the commandant for his authority; and it was often several days before the commandant could find time to inquire into it. If it was discovered, upon inquiry, that the articles would be required, they were received.

Question. Do you not remember furnishing a quantity of copper nails, in July, 1837, for the boat builder's department?

Answer. I do.

Question. When they were delivered, was there not a large surplus; and did you not apply to Commodore Warrington to take them, and what was the result?




[69] Answer. There was a considerable surplus; and I applied to Commodore Warrington, who informed me that he would inquire if they would be wanted. I had to apply a second time; and, after much hesitation, he consented to take them. I could afterwards have got a higher price from individuals than I sold them for to the Government.

Question. Have I ever done any thing officially to favor you in furnishing articles?

Answer. You have not.

JOHN CAPRON.

Answers of John A. Higgins, of the firm of Higgins & Brother, of Norfolk, examined on behalf of Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. JORDAN.

Question. Have not your brother and yourself been in the habit of supplying articles for this yard, for several years past, by authority of the navy agent?

Answer. We have; my brother at first, on his own account, and both of us, since we entered into partnership.

Question. Have I not been extremely particular in receiving from you an excess of articles beyond what the requisitions called for; and when such excess was received, has not application been made to the commodore himself for the authority?

Answer. Yes; but this excess has seldom happened, as we have been always very particular in sending, as nearly as possible, the quantity of any article ordered.

Question. Have I ever done any thing officially to favor you in furnishing articles?

Answer. You have not; on the contrary, I have always found you strict.

Question. Are there not now in the public store eight casks of wrought iron nails, belonging to you, which I have refused to receive? How long have they been there; and have you not applied to the commodore to take them?

Answer. We have; they have been in the public store upwards of a year, and I have unsuccessfully applied to the commodore to take them.

JOHN A. HIGGINS.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 4, 1841.

General interrogatories put to the master workmen in the United States navy yard
at Norfolk, Virginia, by B. Romans, commissioner, appointed to inquire into and
investigate the complaints alleged against the navy agent, naval storekeeper,
and the heads of the civil departments of said yard.

First. Have any articles, not obtained by contract, been purchased by the navy agent, for the use of your department or of the yard? If yea, be pleased to state what they are.

Second. Do you know of whom the said articles were purchased? If yea, be pleased to name the individuals.

Third. Do you know the prices at which any or all of these articles were purchased?

[70] Fourth. Were the prices paid fair and reasonable, or extravagant, exorbitant, or unusually high?

Fifth. Do you know Merit Jordan, Esq., the naval storekeeper?

Sixth. What is his character, as to competency for the discharge of the duties of his station?

B. HOMANS, Commissioner.

Answers of the master workmen at the United States navy yard, Norfolk, Va., to general interrogatories propounded to them by B. Homans, commissioner, &c.

CHARLES A. GRICE, MASTER BLACKSMITH.

To the first. Pig and sheet lead, pig and sheet tin, files, bellows, leather, zinc, steel anvils and vices, are used in my department, and are not obtained by contract.

To the second. I do not know positively, but believe they are furnished, by Messrs. Higgins & Brother, of Norfolk.

To the third. The last files furnished for my department, 12 and 14-inch, flat and half round, were charged at $6 74 per dozen.

To the fourth. I do not know the current prices at market.

To the fifth. Yes.

To the sixth. So far as my transactions with him are concerned, I have had no cause to complain.

To interrogatory by Mr. Jordan.

Question. Did I not call upon you, in the early part of this year, for an estimate of the quantity of sheet lead, block and sheet tin, and zinc, that would probably be required in your department, for twelve months ensuing?

Answer. You did; and I furnished it.

CHARLES A. GRICE.

June 1, 1841.

BENJAMIN SPRATLEY, MASTER ARMORER.

To the first, second, third, and fourth. I have no knowledge.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth Mr. Jordan was educated for the bar, and is a lawyer by profession. I should suppose any person thus educated was qualified for the duties of naval storekeeper.

To interrogatory by Mr. Jordan.

Question. Did I not call upon you, in the early part of this year, for an estimate of the quantity of sheet and block tin that would probably be required in your department, for twelve months ensuing?

Answer. You did; and I gave the estimate.

B. SPRATLEY.

June 4, 1841.

[71] To additional interrogatory by Mr. Jordan.

Question. Did you not inspect a quantity of files, received into the public store some time during the month of March, 1841, and pronounce them to be of good quality.

Answer. I did.

B. SPRATLEY.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 15, 1841.

JOHN B. DAVIS, MASTER MAST AND SPAR MAKER.

To the first. None that I am aware of. I have frequently selected tools required for my department, but know not whether they were furnished by contract or not.

To the second. Principally of Peed & Son, blacksmiths; Young & Blanier, and Tabb & Son. The places where the tools were thus selected have been mentioned on the requisition, and approved by the commandant of the yard.

To the third. I do not.

To the fourth. I cannot say.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth. As far as I am competent to judge, I have found him every way capable.

JOHN B. DAVIS.

June 4, 1841.

JAMES JARVIS, INSPECTOR OF TIMBER.

To the first. Various kinds of lumber, and occasionally purchased by the navy agent.

To the second. John Tunis, Jonathan Kay, Ferguson & Milhado, John. Capron; Mordecai Cooke, Christopher Miller, Taylor Sivals, John K. Cooke, and John P. Tatem.

To the third. I do.

To the fourth. On the average, they are fair.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth. I cannot say.

JAMES JARVIS.

June 4, 1841.

JOHN LINN, MASTER BOAT BUILDER.

To the first, second, third, and fourth. I can state nothing of my own knowledge.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth. I have never heard any thing against him. In my official intercourse with him, I have always received satisfaction.

June 4, 1841.

THOMAS MURRAY, MASTER COOPER.

To the first, second, third, and fourth. Not that I know of.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth. I have known him ever since he has been in that office; [72] and, so far as I have had any business with him, he has always acted promptly and correctly.

To interrogatories by Mr. Jordan.

Question. Have you not been the inspector of provisions, liquors, and candles, ever since I have been naval storekeeper?

Answer. I have.

Question. When any excess of articles has been sent beyond what the requisitions called for, have I not been very particular in refusing to receive them without the commodore's authority?

Answer. I have always understood so. I know it to have been so in many instances, and have no reason to believe but it has always been the case.

THOMAS MURRAY.

June 4, 1841.

CHARLES CASSELL, MASTER SAILMAKER.

To the first, second, third, and fourth. I have no knowledge.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth. I believe him to be fully competent, as far as I am able to judge; and he has always been attentive to his business, as far as cam under my knowledge.

CHARLES CASSELL.

June 4, 1841.

MERRITT MOORE, MASTER GUN CARRIAGE MAKER.

To the first, second, third, and fourth. I have no knowledge.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth. I consider him fully competent.

MERRITT MOORE.

June 4, 1841.

SAMUEL M. LATIMER, MASTER MASON.

To the first. Ten thousand bricks, and five casks of hydraulic cement have been purchased.

To the second. The bricks were purchased of Bernard O'Neale, and the cement of E. Gamage.

To the third. The bricks at $8 per 1,000, and the cement at $3.20 per cask, delivered.

To the fourth. The prices are those usually paid.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth. I know nothing against it.

S. M. LATIMER.

June 4, 1841.

PATRICK WILLIAMS, MASTER HOUSE JOINER.

To the first, second, third, and fourth. I have no knowledge. To the fifth, I do.

[73] To the sixth. So far as my knowledge reaches, I consider him competent.

P. WILLIAMS.

June 4, 1841.

JAMES A. WILLIAMS. MASTER SHIP JOINER.

To the first, second, third, and fourth. I have no knowledge.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth. I know nothing to the contrary, as to his competency.

JAMES A. WILLIAMS.

June 4, 1841.

JOHN HOBDAY, MASTER PAINTER.

To the first. Gum copal and window glass are not contracted articles, to my knowledge.

To the second, third, and fourth. I have no knowledge.

To the fifth. I do.

To the sixth. I have frequently had business with Mr. Jordan, and have always found him prompt and attentive.

JOHN HOBDAY.

June 5, 1841.

STATE OF VIRGINIA, county of Norfolk, sct:

I, John Nash, a justice of the peace in and for the county of Norfolk aforesaid, in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify that Lewis W. Boutwell, Nathaniel Manning, Thomas W. Jordan, William Richardson, Henry Keeling. Charles A. Grice, Thomas Murray, Merritt Moore, James Jarvis, John B. Davis, Charles Cassell, Benjamin Spratley, James A. Williams, Patrick Williams, John Hobday, Samuel M. Latimer, Matthew Denson, John Capron, and John A. Higgins, this day personally appeared before me, in my said county, and severally made oath, in due form of law, that the answers given to the interrogatories propounded to them, and which are contained on the sheets of paper signed by their names, respectively, are true and correct.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this fifteenth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and forty-one.

JOHN NASH, J. P. [SEAL.]

Interrogatories propounded to Commodore Lewis Warrington, of the United States navy,
by Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper at the United States navy yard, Norfolk.

First. Did I not, while under your command at this yard, (a period of nearly five years,) perform my duties to your entire satisfaction, and did you not consider me competent, attentive, and honest, in the discharge of them?

Second. Was I not very particular in receiving any quantity of stores over and above the quantity required by requisition, without your order and authority; and did I not very frequently report excesses to you?

[74] Third. Have you read a piece published in '"Alexander's Weekly Messenger" of the 26th May, 1841, purporting to be from an "attentive friend" in Washington, signed " W," and dated 21st May? If yea, do you not know every allegation therein, affecting my character or official conduct, to be a base calumny?

Fourth. Do you know Matthew Denson, who was once employed in the navy store as an assistant; and do you not know that he was lazy and inattentive to his duties; so much so that in shipping some beef and pork to New York, he shipped it in such bad order, unknown to you or myself, that a report was made of it in consequence, and that you gave him a severe reprimand for it?

Fifth. Were not all my official acts, while under your command, known to you?

M. JORDAN, Naval Storekeeper.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 1, 1841.

Answers of Commodore Lewis Warrington, of the United States navy, to the
interrogatories propounded to him by Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper,
United Stales navy yard, Norfolk, Va.

To the first. You did perform your duties to my satisfaction, and I did consider you competent, attentive, and honest.

To the second. You never, to my knowledge, received an excess of stores without my authority; and you did report excesses at the times of their occurrence, which was not very frequent. Those excesses of articles sometimes remained in the store a year, and were never taken on public account until it was ascertained that they would be wanted.

To the third. I have this moment read that piece, and believe it to be a base calumny.

To the fourth. I do know Matthew Denson, and several times had occasion to reprimand him for his indolence. I came near dismissing him once for his carelessness in shipping some provisions, and making a miscount in the quantity.

To the fifth. I presume they were.

L. WARRINGTON.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 1, 1841.

Interrogatories propounded to Commodore W. B. Shubrick, commandant of the
United States navy yard, Norfolk, Va., by Merit Jordan, Esq., naval storekeeper,
and his replies thereto.

First. Have I not, since under your command at this yard, performed my duties to your entire satisfaction; and do you not consider me competent, attentive, and honest, in the discharge of them?

Answer. Perfectly so.

Second. Have I not been very particular in receiving any quantity of stores over and above the quantity required by requisition, without your order and authority; and have I not reported excesses to you? Have not Messrs. Higgins & Brother, and John Capron, of Norfolk, applied to you to take excesses of articles refused by me?

Answer. You have been very particular in making such reports. The [75] gentlemen you name have applied to me to receive a surplus of articles refused by you.

Third. Have you read a piece published in "Alexander's Weekly Messenger" of the 26th May, 1841, purporting to be from an "attentive friend" in Washington, sighed "W," and dated 21st May? If yea, do you not know every allegation therein, affecting my character or official conduct, to be a base calumny?

Answer. I have read the piece, and believe the allegations to be base calumnies.

Fourth. Have not all my official acts, while under your command, been known to you?

Answer. I presume they have.

Fifth. Do you believe my experience in the duties of naval storekeeper to be of great value to the public service?

Answer. I certainly do.

W. BRANFORD SHUBRICK.

U. S. NAVY YARD, NORFOLK, June 1, 1841.

* * * * * *

U. S. NAVY YARD, GOSPORT, June 14,1841.

Sir: Accompanying this, you will find a series of charges or complaints against my official if not my private character; and, after a most laborious and searching investigation, the testimony, as detailed by the several witnesses, and taken down by the commissioner charged by you to perform this important duty.

Conscious, sir, of the purity of my motives in all my official acts, and of my devotion to the public interest, I cannot but express my profound astonishment, when first informed that allegations like those preferred had been made against me; but when informed of the name of my accuser, and the manner in which those charges had been trumped up, acting as the collector of street evidence and malicious gossip, I readily saw through. the motive of the man seeking thus to injure me. He is, sir, my enemy, and for what I know not, and has sought to gratify his feelings in a way, to say the least of it, unjust and unmanly.

He is also strongly interested in the accomplishment of his design, being, as is said and believed, (as he was under General Jackson's administration.) an applicant for office, not only for himself, but his particular friends also. He has therefore, as you will perceive, two passions to gratify. I will leave him, however, to the punishment or reward of his own conscience, and the opinion of his fellow-citizens here, to whom we are both well known. The investigation, so far, has been conducted by your commissioner in a spirit of fairness both to the Government and accused, highly creditable to himself and satisfactory to them, (at least I can so speak for myself.) and I would not, if I could, have avoided it.

The testimony, sir, is before you, and, relying upon the honest and faithful discharge of my complicated duties, (as I think has been clearly proven,) and the head and heart of him who is either to condemn or acquit, who is both able and willing to discriminate between right and wrong, persecution and oppression, and the weight and character of testimony, I shall confidently rely upon an honorable acquittal.

Acting, sir, always, under the immediate orders and authority of the [76] commandant of the yard, I can commit no official impropriety without his knowledge, except in permitting a waste of the public property, and in rendering an unsatisfactory account of its issue, for which I and my securities would be held responsible. No requisition can be made for stores, for any purpose whatever, without the authority and knowledge of the commodore or commanding officer. He must approve all my official acts, before any action can be had or order given. But, sir, no official impropriety has been committed. The interest of the service requires a constant supply, upon a liberal scale, of the greater number of articles used in the service, so that the different mechanical departments can be supplied promptly and without waiting, as well as the ships fitting for sea. The operations of this yard are large and extensive, as you will readily admit, when informed that the public property on charge amounts to more than a million and a half, and my receipts and expenditures average nearly fifty-thousand dollars per month.

It was with extreme regret and reluctance that I was compelled to introduce, in my behalf, the testimony of my son. It was because no other clerk or person in the store could prove the same facts. He occupies a desk in the same office with myself, and therefore had an opportunity of knowing what others could not; besides, it being his particular duty to attend to the requisition and indent books, and see that all entries are properly made therein.

I will not, sir, occupy your valuable time with a long and labored defence; I will only beg your particular attention to the evidence of my two commanders.

It is alone a triumphant vindication of my character, both private and official, not only against the charges preferred, but against these malignant, base, and defamatory newspaper publications, which have so bitterly and wantonly assailed me.

Be your decision for or against me, an all-wise God knows I shall ever have an approving conscience.

I have the honor to be, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

M. JORDAN, Naval Storekeeper.

Hon. SECRETARY OF THE NAVY

* * * * * *

(A.)

(Copy of printed forms accompanying this report.)
No. _____.

U. S. NAVY YARD, Gosport, ____, 183_ .

Sir: There is required for

Account of

Approved:

Received from M. Jordan, naval storekeeper, the above mentioned articles.

(B.)

No. ____.

NAVY YARD, Gosport, ____, 18__.

Sir: Please to furnish for

To GEORGE LOYALL, Esq., Navy Agent, Norfolk.

Approved.

* * * * * *

(C.)

U. S. NAVY DEPARTMENT

To ____, DR.

Appropriation,

Having examined the above charged article, ____ certify ____ of good quality, and delivered conformably to contract.

Received, (signed duplicate.)

____, Naval Storekeeper.

NAVY YARD, GOSPORT, VA.

This bill is approved for ____ dollars and ____ cents.

____, Commandant.

NAVY AGENT'S OFFICE, Norfolk, ____, 183_ .

Received of ____, navy agent, ____ dollars and ____cents, in full for the above bill.

[78] H 1.

Interrogatories propounded to Robert S. Bernard, by B. Homans and J. H. Butler,
commissioners appointed to investigate complaints alleged against the navy agent,
Norfolk, and his answers thereto; as well as to interrogatories by George Lay all, navy agent.

Question. Who are the principal dealers, in Norfolk, in drugs, medicines and surgical instruments?

Answer. Whitehead &. Beale, M. A. Santas, B. Emerson, N. C. King, and myself in all except surgical instruments.

Question. Will you be pleased to examine the accounts now submitted to you, and state whether the prices therein charged are fair and reasonable, according to the prices then current in the Norfolk market; or whether they are higher, and how much, than the wholesale prices for similar articles of the best quality?

Answer. The articles charged in those accounts are generally higher than I charge; many of them are much higher, some are five, some ten, and some as much as one hundred per cent above my prices.

Question. Is it not probable that any or all of the dealers in drugs, medicines, and surgical instruments, could have supplied the several quantities of articles required for the naval service, if they had been called upon to do so, or been allowed to participate in supplying the navy with articles in their line of business?

Answer. So far as I am concerned, I can say that I could have supplied all the articles required in my line.

Question. Have you ever been called upon by the navy agent to furnish any articles required for the naval service, or to state the prices of any articles in the market?

Answer. I never have.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. LOYALL.

Question. Will you be good enough to say whether means have not been used already to obtain from you information in regard to the matters upon which you have just now been interrogated?

Answer. If the presentation of duplicates of accounts is to convey the idea that means have been used, I say said duplicates have been exhibited to me.

Question. By whom has the information been sought, in what manner, and within what time?

Answer. Mr. John H. Butler handed me said duplicates of accounts and asked me to look over and see if they were charged at fair prices. This was done on Friday, June 18, 1841.

Question. I understand, then, you are brought here today to ratify that which Mr. Butler, without my knowledge, had previously ascertained you are thus prepared to state?

Answer. When Mr. Butler called for me this morning, June 19th, 1841, I did not know exactly for what purpose he wished me before Mr. Homans.

Question. Do you mean to say that the prices charged in the accounts from which these extracts and copies have been made are higher than the [79] prices at which you would have furnished the several articles, at the time required, of the description and quantity, and put up in the manner required, deliverable in the public store at the navy yard?

Answer. I mean to be expressly understood to say, that all the articles contained in said bills, that are in my line, (or I am in the habit of keeping,) I could have furnished at a less price, and delivered at the navy yard; that is, I could have furnished such drugs as are considered merchantable, and of the best sort.

Question. If you would have furnished each and every article in the accounts at a lower price, or the whole at a smaller aggregate amount, I take it for granted you keep on hand, at all times, these several articles, of the quality and description required, and are perfectly familiar with the prices at which they may, at any time, be supplied for public service, and delivered at the navy yard?

Answer. To this inquiry I mean to say, I could have furnished all the articles contained in said accounts, which I keep and vend, at a lower price than is charged in said accounts. Of the kind and quality he delivered, I can say nothing. The kind I would have delivered has given entire satisfaction to all my customers for the last eight years. At and about the time these accounts were furnished, I was generally prepared to furnish any thing in said bills, usually in my line, save the instruments. I considered myself as familiar with the prices of all variety of drugs, at the time these accounts were furnished, as any druggist in these parts.

Question. Will you then furnish me with extracts from your books and accounts to show that, at the periods referred to, the articles in the accounts are charged at higher prices than those charged for your own, of similar quality and description?

Answer. I will furnish you with extracts from my bills and accounts, of such articles as I sold about that time, contained in these accounts, although the comparison should not be made of my bills and these now presented. You might arrive at the Northern prices by examining Henshaw's price current at these periods, and then the calculation could be made as to the prices they should be furnished.

Question. Have you any objection to have your books examined by disinterested persons, to ascertain the prices at which articles of similar quality and description as charged in these accounts have been furnished by you?

Answer. Considering myself on oath, as to the questions and answers here propounded, I of course object to the public perusal of my private matters, when there are so many public ways of obtaining the information you want; such extracts as I furnish I am willing should be investigated by any alderman, under oath. As to the description of articles furnished in said accounts, I am not prepared to say. Had I furnished them, they would have been of such quality as my most particular customers are satisfied with.

Question. Are you transacting business on your own account or as agent?

Answer. June 19,1841, at this time I am agent in the drug business for Thomas G. Broughton; but, at the time I speak of furnishing the said bills, I was acting upon my own account.

[80] BY MR. BUTLER, COMMISSIONER.

Question. Has there been any interview between yourself and any individual in Norfolk borough, wherein you have been solicited to be as moderate as you could in your examination of the accounts, should you be called upon to testify to the same? If yea, be pleased to name the individual or individuals.

Answer. No one has ever asked me to be moderate in any investigation I might be called on for; nor do I recollect of ever having any interview with any one on the subject, save J. H. Butler, as before stated. But, upon the other hand, W. C. Whitehead said he heard I was to sit in judgment on his accounts, and that he was perfectly satisfied.

ROBERT S. BERNARD.

NORFOLK, June 19, 1841.

Interrogatories propounded to N. C. King, by B. Homans and J. H. Butler, commissioners appointed to investigate complaints alleged against the navy agent, Norfolk, and his answers thereto, as well as to interrogatories by the navy agent.

TO GENERAL INTERROGATORIES BY THE COMMISSIONERS.

Question. Who are the principal dealers, in Norfolk, in drugs, medicines, and surgical instruments?

Answer. Santas & Foy, Whitehead & Beale, R. S. Bernard, B. Emerson, and myself.

Question. Will you be pleased to examine the accounts now submitted to you, and state whether the prices therein charged are fair and reasonable, according to the prices then current in the Norfolk market; or whether they are higher, and how much, than the wholesale prices for similar articles of the best quality?

Answer. I answer by giving a statement of the prices that I sold at to country merchants and physicians, upon six months credit, in the years 1839 and 1840.

Question. Is it not probable that any or all the dealers in drugs, medicines, and surgical instruments, could have supplied the several quantities of articles required for the naval service, if they had been called upon to do so, or been allowed to participate in supplying the navy with articles in their line of business.

Answer. Certainly; at least I speak for myself.

Question. Have you ever been called upon by the navy agent to furnish any articles required for the naval service, or to state the prices of any articles in the market?

Answer. No.

BY MR. BUTLER.

Question. Did I not understand you to say, when I called for the accounts now before you, that you could have furnished the medicines for half the prices charged, on an average, and then made a handsome profit?

Answer. After examining a portion of the bills in company with one other druggist, he observed it was useless to proceed, as the prices appeared to be of the same character throughout; and, in conclusion, we agreed [81] that many of the articles could be furnished at half the money; and upon handing you the account, I observed that I would have been glad to have furnished many at half the money, as far as I had examined them.

Question. Are there any articles in those accounts charged at one, two, three, four, or five hundred per cent, above their cost?

Answer. There are some articles charged at one, two, and three hundred per cent, above what articles of a similar kind cost me.

Question. Will you be good enough to specify some of the articles?

Answer. Acetate of lead, 200 per cent.; iodine, 300 per cent.; Butler's effervescent magnesia, 100 per cent.; chamomile flowers, 100 per cent.; patent lint, 100 per cent.

Question by Mr. Butler. When I called upon you for the accounts, and you stated that you would have been glad to have furnished the articles at half the money, was your remark voluntarily made, or was it elicited by any question of mine?

Answer. I made it of my own accord.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. LOYALL.

Question. Will you say whether means have not been used already, to obtain from you information in regard to the matters upon which you have just now been interrogated?

Answer. So far as I am aware of, I answer no.

Question. Do you mean to say that the prices charged in the accounts from which these extracts and copies have been made are higher than the prices at which you would have furnished the several articles, at the time required, of the description and quality, and put up in the manner required, delivered in the public store at the navy yard?

Answer. As regards the prices and quality of the medicines, I answer, I could have furnished them at a lower price, and of the best quality, and put up in the usual manner of those furnished to physicians.

Question. If you would have furnished each and every article in the account at a lower price, or the whole at a smaller aggregate amount, I take it for granted you keep on hand, at all times, these several articles, of the quality and description required, and are perfectly familiar with the prices at which they may at any time be supplied for public service, delivered at the navy yard.

Answer. I keep on hand all articles usually called for in a wholesale and retail drug store.

Question. Have you studied the profession of pharmacy: and, if so, where?

Answer. I decline answering this or any other question, except as to the prices of medicines.

Question. Are you prepared to say that you can detect any adulterations in medicines, so as to be able to say that they are pure or not?

Answer. I answer as to the last interrogatory.

Questions. Can you say what strychnine is, and for what and how it is prepared?

How is sulphate of quinine adulterated, with what is it adulterated, and how can you detect it?

Is there any difference in price between blue pill calomel and many other medicines, all of which are considered of the first quality?

[82] At what rate of advance do you sell your goods?

Answer. I answer as before.

INTERROGATORIES BY MR. HOMANS.

Question. Have you not furnished, lately, a portion of the medicines required for the United States ship Delaware, and were they not of approved quality, and put up in a satisfactory manner?

Answer. Yes.

Question. Have you not been deterred, by the omission to purchase from you articles in your line, required for the naval service, from keeping on hand a full and general assortment of said articles, or from dealing in surgical instruments?

Answer. Not at all.

INTERROGATORIES BY MR. LOYALL.

Question. Have you any reason to believe that any impediment has been interposed by me to your furnishing medical supplies on this station?

Answer. I have not.

Question. What do you consider a fair advance on medical supplies furnished on this station?

Answer. About fifty per cent., on an average.

INTERROGATORY BY MR. BUTLER.

Question. How many physicians in Norfolk and the vicinity are in the habit of getting their supplies of medicine from you, and have they ever made complaints as regards the quality of the medicines furnished?

Answer. Thirty. I have never had complaints made; and only once or twice have articles been returned.

N. C. KING.

NORFOLK, June 21, 1841.

NORFOLK, July 10, 1841

I wish to correct my answer to the second interrogatory propounded by Mr. Loyall, by substituting "twenty-five per cent." for "fifty per cent."

N. C. KING.

Image

Image

Interrogatories propounded to Dr. James Cornick, U. S. navy, by B. Homans and J. H. Butler, commissioners appointed to investigate complaints alleged against the
navy agent, Norfolk, and his answers thereto, as well as to interrogatories
by George Loyall, navy agent.

TO INTERROGATORES BY THE COMMISSIONERS.

Question. Are you acquainted with the prices of drugs, medicines, and surgical instruments, in this market?

Answer. When a requisition has been placed in my hands for the pur- [89] chase of articles for the medical department of the naval service, I have been governed by the price current of the day, and inquiries of the dealers in those articles. Wherever I could purchase them cheapest and best, there I have bought them.

Question. Have you been on duty on this station during the last four years, and for what portion of that period?

Answer. I have been the surgeon of the navy yard during the whole of that period.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. LOYALL.

Question. Will you say whether hospital stores, drugs, medicines, apparatus, and the various instruments found in the requisitions of surgeons, are not constantly fluctuating in price, as well in consequence of the particular description of these several articles, as from the peculiar and varying opinions and preferences of the surgeons themselves?

Answer. The articles enumerated above vary in their prices in consequence of new articles appearing, and from the difficulty in procuring the articles for which a surgeon may have a preference; and, I will also state, the price is often very much enhanced by the particular manner in which the surgeon may wish them put up.

Question. Is it not the usage of the service for the surgeon to take his requisition, that he may make his own selections, both as regards the articles themselves and the persons furnishing them?

Answer. As the surgeon of the yard, I have employed whomsoever I pleased, and have been directed by the navy agent to say to surgeons attached to ships in commission, that he wished them to go wherever they pleased to purchase their articles. His object being to satisfy them, he imagined he could not do better than to tell them to select their own medicines, &c.

Question by Mr. Homans. How long has this usage existed?

Answer. This usage has existed about five years.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. LOYALL.

Question. I believe you are the surgeon of the United States ship Delaware, just about to depart for a foreign station. In procuring the medical supplies for that ship, have you purchased any articles of Mr. R. S. Bernard?

Answer, I have purchased no articles of Mr. Bernard.

Question. Were you prevented, by any intimation from me, from making purchases of Mr. Bernard?

Answer. I never received any intimation from you that you did not wish me to purchase of Mr. Bernard, nor do I recollect you ever expressed any preference in favor of any one.

Question. Among the druggists here, whom have you recommended to the naval surgeons coming to this station, that it would be advisable to procure their medical supplies of?

Answer. I have informed them that Whitehead had been more frequently employed than any other druggist, but they were at liberty to examine all the shops, and purchase them where they pleased. They were told that the navy agent wished them to use their discretion in obtaining their own supplies.

[90] Question. Have I ever held any conversation with you, or did I know any thing, until this morning, of the matters about which you were called upon to be interrogated by the commissioners?

Answer. No conversation or word ever passed between us respecting this examination. I received Mr. Homans's note this morning, and called at your office to ask why I had been summoned.

Question. Has any friend or supposed agent of mine suggested to you any thing as to the evidence you might be required to give before these commissioners?

Answer. I had no knowledge that I should be called on to give testimony, nor has a suggestion or intimation been made to me by any one. I did not know even that the commissioners were still in Norfolk, until I received Mr. Homans's note.

JAMES CORNICK, Surgeon U. S. navy.

NORFOLK, June 19, 1841.

Interrogatories propounded to Doctor James Cornick, United States, navy, examined on behalf of George Loyall, Esq., navy agent, Norfolk, and his answers thereto.

TO INTERROGATORY BY MR. LOYALL.

Question. Will you be pleased to state what you know in relation to the account now submitted to you for medical supplies, hospital stores, surgical instruments, &c, furnished by Whitehead & Beale, for the sloop of war Yorktown?

Answer. I was requested by Commodore Shubrick to take the account of Whitehead & Beale, for medicines, hospital stores, &c, against the Yorktown, and inform him if the prices were fairly charged. I stated to the commodore I would go to the principal druggists with a price current, and endeavor to learn their actual prices. I went to Santas & Toy, to Emerson, and, I believe, to N. C. King. I found some of the articles overcharged, and others undercharged—the majority being in favor of Whitehead & Beale. When I informed those gentlemen of the duty assigned me, and showed them the result, Mr. Whitehead agreed at once to deduct, in every case where he had overcharged, and without reference to the articles wherein he had charged less than others. This was done, and an account given Commodore Shubrick of the result. Mr. Whitehead requested me to state to the commodore, that, in settling his accounts for medicines, &c, he would be glad if he would assign to the surgeon of the yard the duty of examining his bills, previous to their being brought before him for approval.

TO INTERROGATORY BY THE COMMISSIONERS.

Question. Do you know or can you recollect what was the whole amount deducted from said bill?

Answer. I do not; but the bill itself will show. I recollect one article (strychnine) which was more than the ship required—an ounce instead of one drachm—the price of which was reduced from $34 to about $15 or $16.

NORFOLK, July 17, 1841.

[91] STATE OF VIRGINIA, borough of Norfolk, sct:

I, Giles B. Cooke, a justice of the peace in and for the borough of Norfolk, aforesaid, in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify, that Dr. James Cornick this day personally appeared before me, in my said borough, and made oath that the answers given to the interrogatories propounded to him, as within written, as well as to the interrogatories propounded to him on the 19th June, 1841, are true and correct.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this twenty-third day of July, one thousand eight hundred and forty-one.

G. B. COOKE, [SEAL.]

Interrogatories propounded to Doctor George Blacknall, of the United States navy, by B. Homans and J. H. Butler, commissioners appointed to investigate complaints alleged against the navy agent, Norfolk and his answers thereto, as well as to interrogatories by George Loyall, Esq., navy agent.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY THE COMMISSIONERS.

Question. Are you conversant with the prices of drugs, medicines, and surgical instruments, in Norfolk?

Answer. Having been in the habit of making purchases for the naval hospital for the last eighteen months, I know something of the prices of medicines.

Question. Will you be pleased to examine the accounts now submitted to you, and state whether the prices therein charged are fair and reasonable, according to the prices then current in the Norfolk market, or whether they are higher, and how much, than the wholesale prices for similar articles of the best quality?

Answer. I have examined the bills, and think some of the articles are charged high; yet I would remark, that the prices of drugs for the navy depend so much upon the manner in which they are put up, it is difficult to say whether the charges be too great or not. I would also remark, that the prices of drugs, medicines, &c, are extremely variable, even within a very limited space of time.

INTERROGATORIES BY MR. LOYALL.

Question. Where do you obtain the most of your medicinal supplies?

Answer. My requisitions are sent alternately to S. & W. Watts, of Portsmouth, for one quarter, and for the next quarter to Whitehead & Beale, of Norfolk. If I find any particular article which I desire in other drug stores, I request those gentlemen to procure the article.

Question. How do the prices in the accounts which you have examined compare with the prices in accounts for medicinal supplies for the hospital?

Answer. I think the charges in the accounts I have examined are generally higher. That, however, is to be expected, as the articles were put up for vessels going on very distant cruises, and which made it necessary to put them up with much more care.

Question. Do you consider the course pursued in obtaining medicinal [92] supplies the proper one, or that any other would be likely to give satisfaction, or answer any valuable end?

Answer. I think the practice of permitting surgeons to make their own purchases decidedly the best. Nor do I think that any other course would answer, unless some competent medical officer were appointed to make the purchases.

Question. In procuring your medical supplies, have you ever received an intimation from me of preference for any one?

Answer. I do not think I have, in making medical or any other purchases.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY THE COMMISSIONERS.

Question. In purchasing articles from the druggists who supply the hospital, or in selecting articles at other stores, do you previously inquire or ascertain the prices?

Answer. I am not very particular to do so.

Question. Do you examine and scrutinize the prices of articles for the hospital, when the accounts are rendered?

Answer. Always.

GEORGE BLACKNALL, Surgeon.

NORFOLK, July 1, 1841.

STATE OF VIRGINIA, borough of Norfolk, sct:

I, Charles H. Shield, a justice of the peace in and for the borough of Norfolk aforesaid, in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify, that Doctor George Blacknall this day personally appeared before me, in my said borough, and made oath, in due form of law, that the answers given to the interrogatories propounded to him, as written on this sheet, are true and correct.

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this twenty-ninth day of July, one thousand eight hundred and forty-one.

CHARLES H. SHIELD, Alderman, [SEAL.]

Interrogatories propounded to Doctor George Blacknall, United States navy, examined on behalf of George Loyall, Esq., navy agent, Norfolk, and his answers thereto.

TO INTERROGATORY BY MR. LOYALL.

Question. Have you examined carefully the accounts of Whitehead & Beale, for drugs, medicines, hospital stores, &c., with the accounts of other druggists, from whom you obtained similar supplies ? and, if yea, what is the result of that comparison?

Answer. I have carefully compared the accounts of Whitehead & Beale with those of S. & W. Watts, the only persons who furnished drugs, medicines, hospital stores, &c., for the hospital during the year 1840; and I find that the charges of Whitehead & Beale are less than those of S. & W. Watts. The difference is small, nor do I think the charges are higher in either case than they should be.

[93] TO INTERROGATORY BY THE COMMISSIONERS.

Are you acquainted with the wholesale prices of drugs and medicines in other markets? I do not think I am.

GEORGE BLACKNALL.

NORFOLK, July 20, 1841.

NORFOLK, July 29, 1S41.—Sworn to before me.

CHARLES H. SHIELD.

Interrogatories propounded by Charles H. Beale, examined on behalf of George Loyall, Esq., navy agent, Norfolk, and his answers thereto.

TO INTERROGATORIES BY MR. LOYALL.

Question. Do you belong to the firm of Whitehead & Beale, dealers in Norfolk in drugs, medicines, hospital stores, surgical instruments, &c.?

Answer. I do.

Question. Will you be pleased to examine the accounts of the firm for medical supplies, hospital stores, surgical instruments, &c., now submitted to you, together with the depositions taken upon the same, and state such facts and matters, in relation to both, as you may deem just and proper?

Answer. After a careful examination of our bills for medical supplies, hospital stores, &c., and of the testimony in regard to the same, I give the following statement as my answer to the interrogatory:

First. We have procured copies of bills of other druggists against the United States naval service, a comparison of whose prices with ours shows that, almost in every case where similar articles are charged, they are at the same or higher rates. A list of these prices is given below, with the proper explanations.

Secondly. No druggist or apothecary who has never supplied the navy, can be competent witnesses as to the prices of those who have been in the habit of so doing, because—1st. Medicines, and every article required, are put up in a totally different manner from those supplied to country druggists, or even to physicians. 2d. There are a large number of articles, generally, required by the service, which are very seldom used by other practitioners, and therefore are not usually kept in a drug store. These articles have to be kept by us, and very often for so long a period that they become injured, and have to be replaced by similar ones. 3d. Often, when articles have been sent on board, after a moiety has been used, the remainder has been returned to us, and we have resupplied the original quantity without extra charge for that used. 4th. We have ordered, at the request of naval surgeons, particular kinds of instruments, &c., which afterwards have been declined, (not on account of quality, but in consequence of a new preference,) and have been thrown on our hands.

Thirdly. The only testimony concerning our bills, by a druggist who has supplied the naval service, is that of Mr. Thomas D. Toy, some of whose answers to the several interrogatories proposed to him I shall examine. His second answer is of this import: that he could have furnished the bill of W. & B. against the Constitution for one-half, and those against the Yorktown and Dale for two-thirds of the amount charged. In his answer the gentleman has been peculiarly unfortunate; and, to say the [94] least, too hasty in his reply. Had he taken the trouble to examine the whole of the bills alluded to, he would have found reasons to have made a different answer; he would have seen, that not one-half of those amounts was for medicines, chemicals, and all those articles usually kept in an apothecary's or druggist's store; and that the remainder was for articles of a character concerning which he knows little or nothing, viz: H. Schively's surgical instruments, (which cost from 75 to 100 per cent, higher than those obtained from other makers,) hardware, dry goods, groceries, preserved meats, and furniture; all of which (except the instruments) are at cost prices, and the instruments themselves afford but a moderate profit. A list of these several articles and their value, on our "bills against the Constitution, Yorktown, and Dale, is also submitted below; and their general correctness can be proved by an examination of the bills themselves. Also, the hardware, hospital stores, &c., enumerated above, have been supplied by us, at the request of the surgeons themselves, that they might not be put to the inconvenience and trouble of going round to a dozen different stores every day, when they had their official duties to attend to; and these articles are always at our risk, until receipted for by the surgeon, and the drayage, freight, &c., always paid by us. His reply to the third question is, that he could have furnished, if called upon, any or all the articles required for the service. To this answer I have only to say, that Mr. Toy has called on us to purchase surgical instruments of H. Schively's make, which he said he never kept, and expressed his surprise when told the cost of the same. This shows completely that this answer was imprudently made, and that he knew nothing of the prices of the instruments furnished by us, although he said he could have supplied the bills alluded to for one-half and two-thirds of the amounts charged. His answer to a question "whether the accounts of Santas & Toy have not been presented and paid by the navy agent," is as follows: "That we have occasionally had accounts for prescriptions furnished to the order of the surgeon of this station, which have been paid by the navy agent;" which undoubtedly conveys the idea that they have had no accounts except for prescriptions. But, either his memory is very deficient, or he must have imagined that nothing was known about the matter. There is a bill of Santas & Toy against the dispensary, (navy yard, Gosport,) bearing date June 30, 1840, for medicines, and not prescriptions, in which the charges for similar articles are just as high as on those of ours, which he has stigmatized as exorbitant and extravagant. There are also bills of his present partner, and of H. Buff & Co., who are supposed to be a branch of the house of Santas & Toy, a comparison of whose prices with ours is on the list above referred to, and submitted below.

Fourthly. We have never charged the naval service for prescriptions, although a great number has been put up by us for surgeons of ships, and of hospital, and of navy yard.

Fifthly. It is strange that, if our prices are so much higher than those of others, the naval surgeons, who have the privilege of procuring their supplies from whom they choose, should generally prefer that we should supply them.

Sixthly. Every medicine and article supplied by us for the navy, and especially for vessels destined for sea, have been put up in the neatest and most careful manner, to prevent the injurious effects of the sea air. For ex- [95] ample: medicines, chemicals, &c., are packed in the strongest ground glass-stoppered bottles, (both tincture and salt-mouth,) labeled neatly, and often with gold leaf, (at the particular request of the surgeon,) which label of itself is worth from 19 to 25 cents apiece, but for which no extra charge is made. Articles, such as arrow root, barley, sago, corn meal, tapioca, &c., are always put in tin canisters of a convenient size; ointments, chloride of lime, &c., in strong earthen jars, all of which must enhance the prices of the articles, and which it must be apparent have not been considered by those who have given their testimony on the subject.

Seventhly. Mr. N. C. King, in his testimony, says: that after examining a portion only of the bills, he concludes that a great many articles could have been furnished at half of the prices charged, but did not take the trouble to examine the whole of the bills, nor inquire the manner in which they were put up; and it is clear that the considerations mentioned above have had no influence in his statement. He has also furnished a list of prices of medicines sold by him in 1839 and 1840, comprising about sixty articles, not one-half of the number of medicines exclusively, generally furnished by us on a medical requisition. Even some of these prices are higher than we have charged, viz: Turkey rhubarb, nitrate of silver, ung. hydrarg., &c, while a number of articles are put below cost, viz:

Strychnine, cost of which was $14 to $15, is put at $12.00
Castor oil, $7.50 per dozen, is put at $6.50
Tart, antim., $1.50 per pound is put at $1.00
Extract dandelion, $2 to $2.75 per pound is put at $1.25
Ung. cantharid., $1.25 per pound is put at $1.00

English calomel is put down at 12-1/2 cents advance on a pound, and Dover's powder is put at cost. The reason why Mr. King should sell articles below or at cost prices is difficult to be imagined; and the only conclusion at which we can reasonably arrive is, that either the fairness of his motives must be impugned, or that the articles sold must have been of an inferior quality, as it is well known that nothing is so common, or hard to be detected, as adulterations of drugs, medicines, &c., although the caption of his list of prices expressly declares that the specified articles are warranted to be of the best quality; moreover, from the fact of his list being for a small portion only of the medicines on our bills, it is but rational to conclude that our prices for those omitted by him were at lower rates than he was in the habit of supplying them. Not the slightest allusion is made to surgical instruments, &c., which are on our bills, nor in his list of prices has he a single article of the kind.

Eighthly. When the bills for medical supplies for the Yorktown and Dale were presented to Commodore Shubrick for his approval, he requested Dr. Patton, in the one case, and Dr. Cornick in the other, to examine the prices if they were just and reasonable. These gentlemen went around to several druggists, and, after a scrutinous examination, the following was the result: Dr. Cornick found that he could procure strychnine for $15 per ounce, (for an ounce of which we had charged $34,) and two or three other articles for less than our prices, making in the whole $36, while a number of articles on our bill were at lower rates than he found them elsewhere; our strychnine had cost us high, for it was a pure article; but thinking perhaps the prices of the article had declined, and for other reasons, we made no objection, and deducted the sum of $36 from the bill for the Yorktown. When Dr. Patton, in the same manner, examined the prices [96] on the bill of the Dale, (although the prices were the same as those for the Yorktown, with the exception of those mentioned,) he also went around to different druggists, to see if the articles could be procured at lower rates; and, to our surprise, told us that certain articles could be procured at less prices than we had charged. Knowing that our prices were just and equitable, we refused to make any deduction; and, after explanation to Dr. Patton, he was completely satisfied as to the fairness of our charges. Concerning these facts, Drs. Cornick and Patton are ready to testify; and yet, after these facts, a partner of the firm on whom these calls were made has sworn he could have furnished those very bills for one-half or two-thirds the amounts charged. Further comment is useless.

Ninthly. United States navy surgeons who have procured their medical supplies from us have always been accustomed to call at our store every day during the period allotted us to put up their supplies, (while they were in town;) they have examined and selected for themselves; they have directed the particular manner in which they should be packed, and have, in every and all cases, expressed their gratification as to the quality, package, and of the medicines, &c, furnished by us.

These considerations, we think, are amply sufficient to show that the charge against us of exorbitant prices against the naval service are false and unfounded, and that the evidence of sundry druggists on this subject has been given with too imprudent haste, and these gentlemen, in their hurry to gain some particular end, have proceeded beyond the bounds of candor and prudence. We can show that the prices of other druggists who have supplied the navy are the same and higher than ours; we can show that articles of the same name are at a difference in cost of 100 per cent, on account of quality, and from being the manufacture of particular persons, and that navy surgeons always and properly desire everything of the very best quality. When all these statements and facts are taken into account, it is difficult to imagine in what spirit such testimony as that we have examined could be uttered; we regret it for their sakes; but a decent and proper regard for our own characters has restrained us from saying less than we have, and charity forbids us to say more.

The preceding statement is divided into four heads only, to be more concise. There are a number of other articles which we have furnished, such as tin, glass, crockery ware, &c, which are included in one of the heads above. We would also remark that, under the head of medicines, &c, is also included every description of glass ware, canisters, jars, &c, in which the medicines were packed, which materially increases the prices of the medicines.

(NEXT PAGE)

Site Table of Contents