THE DAILY EVEfllKQ TELEGIUrR PHILADELPHIA, FRIDAY, JANUARY . 14, 1870. 21X23 UAV7. Khar lttr frsm x-frtcrclary Wrllre l Hcrrrtapy Kobcuon The Promotion f Naval miers) Mecretnr y Hobcuon'ii Report At tacked Containing jtllimtRKtraenta. IIabtfobp, Jan. 10, 1870. Hon. George M. Bobt'Bon, Secretary of the Navy Sir: In yonr annual report as Secretary of the Navy, on the 1st of December, lttU'.t, is tbe follow ing paragraph: In the year 1865 a board, composed of admi rals tv ho bad commanded squadrons during tbe war, with Admiral Farrngut aa President, waa convened by tbe Secretary of Die Navy, 10 re port tbe names of such ollkers aa tbey deemed worthy of advancement under the act of April 21, 1804. The board, after careful consideration, made a report strictly according to the letter of their Instructions, and their eductions would, it Is believed, have been satisfactory to the navy sit large. The recommendations of the board -were, however, not acquiesced in, and the ad vancement was made quite Independently of their action. The result is that many oflicurs consider themselves unjiiBtly treated, and a feel ing of discontent exists most undesirable in the service. Some of the cases affected by this action have already been acted on by the ad ministration. But it is felt that the real merit of each case can only be properly judged of by those who were personally cognizant of all its circumstances, and that too many considerations would be lost sight of In the lapse of time to per mit of direct action by the department without the risk of further mistakes. It is suggested that the department be autho rized to appoint a board of olllccrs removed by high rank from all personal interest on this question, to examine the cases complained of, and to report their conclusions for such action by tbe Executive and Congress as to them may seem proper. This paragraph is such a perversion of the facts and circumstances relating to the ad vancement of the officers at the clone of the war, and betrays such an absence of correct information on the subject, that I was sur prised it should have found a place in an official document of the character of an annual report of the Secretary of the Navy. I was unwilling to believe that you had intention ally and intelligently misrepresented the facts, and I knew that no one of the Board of Admirals could communicate the proceedings of the board which I had convened to assist me with their opinions, except by a breach of trust. I therefore came to the conclusion that you had not personally given the subject that attention which it deserved, and that you had been imposed upon by some one un worthy of confidenye. I did not regret to learn soon after that the Ilonse of Representatives culled on you by resolutyon for the report to which you had invited their attention, and I was interested to see the response you would make to that call. While waiting for this response I re ceived from Mr. Ollloy, Chief Clerk of the Navy Department, a brief note stating that a thorough search had been made for the report in question, but it was not to be found on the ' files of the department, and asking me if I had it or a copy in my possession. I replied at once that I was in possession of neither the original nor a copy, but that I had a tabular statement of the recommendations, and in formed him the board had been convened in formally and confidentially to assist, not to control me, that their recommendations were not obligatory, had no legal validity, were without responsibility, and, being merely confidential expressions of opinion, it was a question whether they should go on the files of the department. I expressed my surprise that you should have BKaunieu u BLUie m your oiuuitu report iuo contents of a document or documents which you had never seen, and represent what was satisfactory in the proceedings of the board and what action of mine gave discontent, when you had no knowledge on the subject, had never read the proceedings of the Board of Admirals, and were ignorant of the princi ples on which I acted. I requested him to submit my letter to you. Mr. Offley acknow ledged the receipt of my letter on tbe 22d of December; said he had submitted it to you, and that it was in your possession. The "Washington correspondent of the New York Herald, on the 'JM of December, the day after you had possession of my letter, sent to that paper the following statement: Several days ago the House passed a resolu tion calling upon the Secretary of the Navy for the record of the proceedings of the Board of Admirals appointed two or three years ago by the Secretary of the Navy to examine and de signate oftlcer. of the navy for promotion. It Beems there was some irregularity about the manner in which this board made its recommen dations, and there is a great deal of complaint that officers were promoted without regard to their war record and other qualifications. The Naval Committee of the House propose to over haul the matter. Search was made at the Navy Department for the record of the boards proceedings, but it could not be found. Finally it was ascertained that it had been car ried off by the late Secretary Welles when he made his exit from the department. Secretary Robeson directed Mr. Offley, the Chief Clerk, to address a note to Mr. Welles, setting forth that the document had been called for by resolution , of Congress, and asking him to return it. In reply to this Mr. Oilley to-day received a letter from Mr. Welles, wherein he abuses the present Secretary of the Navy In round terms for inter fering with what he calls his (Welles') private affairs. That record, says Welles, was private. It was never intended to be made public, and he refuses to surrender it. The officials of the Navy Department say that it was as much a part of the files and records of the department as an order is, and that Mr. Welles had no right to remove it. It is supposed that he had some personal matter in view when he carried it off. Now it ia not true that I carried off the re port; it ia not true that I abused you for interfering in my private affairs; it is not true that I bave refused to surrender the proceed ings. These gross, palpable, intentional mis statements in the letter of the IlcraUl corres pondent are very much in character with the paragraph in your paper which I have quoted. The correspondent of the lit-raid received his information from some source; and as my letter, which ia referred to and so much falsi fied, was in your possession, I am left in little doubt as to that source. As you have never seen the proceedings of the Board of Admirals and know not what their recommendations were, by what autho rity and on what data do you say "their selections wonld, it is believed, have been satisfactory to the navy at large ?" By what authority do you say "the advancement was made quite independently of their action ?" When I inform you that nearly one-half the officers would have been superseded or have lost rank by the action of the Board of Admi rals had not other action been taken, and. that to enable me to carry into effect such-of their recommendutions as I approved without re ducing others to a lower position on the regis ter, I procured further legislation in 1800. you will perceive that neither of your statements is correct. From the nature of the case, when a por tion of the offioers were to be superseded, and a large portion were to lose rank, it was im possible to have made selections which would be "satisfactory to the navy at large" im possible to avoid some discontent. On the other point, that of making advancements in dependently of the action of the board, I aj say, as the proceedings will show, that while, as was my duty, I acted on my own convictions, I gave weight and consideration to their opinions, and in some cases deferred, perhaps too far, to their suggestions. In a large portion of the cases our views coincided, bnt there were instances where favoritism, prejudice, or mistaken judgment was appa rent. There were other instances where I was in possession of information unknown to the admirals, and where I could put a more correct estimate than the board on servicos rendered. They were, perhaps excusably, partial to those who had served under them; and perhaps some of them were prejudiced against and failed to rightly appreciate those of other commands. There were officers, also, who had acquitted themselves with credit, on other than squad ron dnty, whom I could not neglect. Nor could I with my ideas of duty, although yon seem to suppose it proper, delegate to others authority which legally devolved on me and for which I was responsible. Few more un pleasant duties devolved upon me during my administration of the department than the delicate and difficult one of selecting and pro moting officers, however meritorious, over others who also had merit. I have been brought in intimate relations with naval offi cers of every grade in a trying and critical period of our history, had studied and learned the character of each, and felt a personal as well as official obligation to those who stood firmly by the flag and the Union when many of their associates deserted and others faltered. Some were necessarily to be superseded; but I could not willingly see any of these true and gallant men, after years of faithful war servico, suffer Iofb of rank which they would consider degra dation. But the proceedings and report of the Board of Admirals, which you represent as "satisfactory to the navy at largo," took from nearly one-half the officers their rank and placed them lower upon the register. For this the board was not blamable. It was an inevitable result from an attempt to execute the acts of April, 180, and January, 180,r, authorizing promotions and advancements. While the award of merit to a portion of the officers was not undeserved, the implied censure or reflection upon the others was cruel, and would have been felt by them to be unjust. Knowing the worth, fidelity, and patriotism of most of the latter, although their career may not have been as brilliant nor their opportunities as favorable as those of some of their more for tunate brethren, I was not willing to be an instrument to mortify or degrade them by carrying into effect the recommendations of the Board of Admirals without an effort in their behalf. The whole subject was beset with difficulty and embarrassment, and such were my feelings towards the ofllcers who would be humbled and s-ronged, my regard for the whole service, and my convictions of what was right, that I delayed action until the following year. The Board of Admirals was first convened early in 1805 there was a second session some months later but the promotions and advancements were not made until after the passage of the act of July, 1800, nearly one and a half years later. In the meantime the Naval Committee and Con gress, aft;r beingmade acquainted with the cir cumstances, concurred with me as to the im policy and injustice of reducing the rank of faithful officers. After much and mature de liberation the result was the "Act to define the number and regulate the appointment of officers in the navy and for other purposes," approved July 2, 1800. This act, passed morethen two years after the law of April, 18(5, the only law on this subject with which you appear to bo conversant, enlarged the number of each grade, relieved the department of its most serious embarrassments, and avoided the degradation of a large number of worthy officers from the rank which they had at tained and of which they ought not, without fault, to be deprive I. You make no allusion to this act of 1800, and seem not to be aware that its enlarged provisions, with the recom mendations of the Board of Admirals, weie the basis of my action and enabled the Gov ernment to do justice to the whole service. As soon as the law of 180G was enacted I invited Admiral Farragut to Washington, and with him I took up and revised the whole register, having the proceedings of the Board ot Admirals ancj toe record of every officer before us. No other officer was summoned on this occasion, for I desired to avoid all favoritism and combinatioas such as have sometimes afflicted the navy. More than twenty years previously, when chief of a naval bureau, I had witnessed the pernicious effects of cliques and personal favoritisms in the service, and there were indications of a disposition in some quarters to revive the evil. Admiral Farragut was at the head of the service, and bad never been connected with any of the cliques and combinations which had afflicted it, and which I had labored with, some success to eradicate. I knew his impar tiality, his devotion to the true interests of the country and the whole navy, that he was free from favoritism or prejudice, and that he was a safe and reliable counsellor who wanted a United States navy and not a personal navy. With him I went through the entire register, canvassed each individual case, and it was the wish and intention of both of us to do equal and exaet justice to all; not that I expected to give satisfaction to every man, for that was an impossibility. Aa the responsibility of the promotions was with me, ana as in some instances I knew of services rendered with which he was not ac quainted, I acted on my own conviotiona, in conformity with his expressed wish and our mutual understanding before the register was taken up. Whatever errors, therefore, were committed, I am responsible for, and not Ad miral Farragut. I mention the fact of con sulting that distinguished officer in the fiaal revision of the promotions because your re port makes no mention of it and conveys a false impression of the whole subject. I re gretted that the time allotted us to accom plish this work after the passage of the act of 1800 was so brief; but it was near the close of the session, and only three days were given us to make the review. The promotions and advancements thus made continued undis turbed while I was in the department, except in one instance, when the battle record of of the officers did not reach the department until after the nominations were made and confirmed. You state that "some of the cases a fleeted by this action have already been acted on by the administration," and urge this as a reason why you should "be authorized to appoint a board of officers" in order that "each case may be properly fudged." The imputation that the cases have not been "nronerlv judged" is made without any knowledge of the facts, for when called upon for the pro ceedings of the Board of Admirals it is ad mitted yen have not seen them, and you make no mention of the consultation with Admiral Farragut at the close. As to appointing a board of officers to re examine a subject that was , disposed of nearly four years ago, you have the autho rity to convene such a board without Con gressional action, and the board can report orally or In writing, bnt after all, the matter is purely executive, not legislative. No Con gressional action was taken, nor was any board of officers convened in the "cases already acted on by the administration." Such a "board at this day would create discon tent, and afford an opportunity for a master spirit to exercise partiality and form a clique devoted to his personal interests, if so inclined. I am aware of but two cases which have been "acted on by this administration." That yon may have the full benefit of the action in these cases, I shall give yon the facts of each, as they have been made exceptional. Captain T. II. Elevens had a fair war re cord, although his efficiency may have been sometimes impaired by his habits, a fact whiclj had its influence with the Board of Ad mirals and with the department also when the promotions were nnder consideration. He was registered No. 24 on the grade of com manders when the Board of Admirals was convened, and they recommended not only that he should not be advanced, but that he should be put back one number on the list, and be registered No. 2.r. But I, instead of reducing him in rank below 2, was enabled by the act of 1800 to advance him to 10. He was one who considered himself "unjustly treated," and he applied to Congress for re dress. His case was referred to the Naval Committee, who examined the subject and reported against him. Congress concurred in that report. Last spring the President, not withstanding the proceedings of the Board of Admirals, the action of the Navy Department, the adverse report of the Naval Committee and of Congress, promoted him to a higher position on the list of captains. The other and the only other officer who has been taken from the position assigned him and in like manner promoted is Captain Thomas II. Tatterson, a brother-in-law of Vice-Admiral Torter. Captain Fatterson was No. 25 on the register as commander. He had no battle record, and the Board of Admirals recommended that he should be reduced to rank No. 28. I ad vanced him to No. 11. These two officers were last spring taken from their position on the register and promoted simultaneously over eighteen captains, most of them exem plary, efficient, and gallant officers, with an honorable record for heroic service. I am aware of no reason why exceptions should have been made in favor of these two officers. They constitute, I believe, the whole of what you call "some of tho cases" which "have been already acted on by the administration." This letter has been drawn from me in con sequence of an application from the depart ment for information, and of the use which has been made of my reply. I had not pro posed, nor do I now propose, to comment on tbe numerous errors . which pervade your report, obviously intended, in many in stances, to reflect on the previous adminis tration of the department. Some of your statements are, however, as open to criticism and quite as exceptionable as the paragraph in relation to tns advancement of officers, Without any general review, duty to myself requires, perhaps, that 1 should, when writing you, advert to one or two points. Among the subjects wluch you make promi nent is the amount ot work which has been accomplished in repairing vessels, changing their character and giving them snip rig, and the groat economy resulting therefrom, as compared with what you coll the "old system." You fail to state, however, the amount of money which has been and isboing expended to effect these changes. We both know it exceed 3 by millions the appropria tions marie by Congress lor repairs; and on this question of expending money when Con gress has refused to make appropriations we have differed. Congress was informed by me of the condition of our yards and vessels, and that repairs were needed; but refused to appropriate the funds for these repairs. would not, after this refusal, invade the Treasury, in defiance of the legislative branch of the Government, and take unappropriated funds. The repairs and refitments of vessels were consequently limited to the few ships re quired to maintain the squadrons in force Congress was advised of this fact, and I, in my annual report, in December, 1808, stated: To preserve and protect tho vessels and other nroncrtv at our nav vards Is a dntv nromnted tV economy and dictated by A nroticr regard for the public interest. Work should not be wholly suspended on the ships which have been com menced and are yet unfinished, but they should bo completed and gradually launched and brought into service as they may be wanted. If properly protected they can remain on the stocks fur years without lnjnry after the hulls are finished. Each vessel, when she returns from a cruise, should be at once repaired and placed in an efficient condition. Hulls and engines, after long service in different climates, become worn and injured, and, If neglected, will rapidly decay. It cannot be true economy to withhold appropriations essential for full and thorough repairs, for completing Improvements which have been commenced, and for protecting and afford ing facilities necessary to the good order, proper coudition and efficiency of the navy yards and navy establishments. In some respects the public interest has been made to suffer from neglect or refusal to make sufficient appropria tions for the purposes herein indicated, and It is earnestly recommended that such omission bo hereafter avoided. I had, three years ago, seen the disposition to curtail naval estimates and appropriations without discrimination, and, to prevent in jury to the publio service ia consequence of withholding the means necessary for needful repairs, I, on the lth February, 108, ad-, dressed a special communication to the Naval Committee, urging, while reduction might be made in some appropriations, that "appropria tions may be made for repairs, in accordance with the estimates furnished," and closed my statement with the following remarks: I have deemed it my duty to call your atten tion, as chairman of the Committee on Naval Affairs, to the impolicy of impairing and crip pling the public service, as proposed in the bill reported by the appropriation committee. The department has no personal ends to serve iu seeking to have suitable appropriations made. Only the best good of the country and the keep ing of that arm of tho military service with whose administration I am charged in condition to maintain everywhere and upon all occasions the honor of our flag and the interests of our country have been considered, if Congress withholds the means and the power and effi ciency of the American navy are thereby Im paired, 1 shall at least have the satisfaction of reflecting that it Is through no neglect of mine; and if upon a change of administration it shall be said, as was remarked soon after the last ministerial change in Great Britain, that "tho present Government upon taking office were alarmed when they saw the appearance of de crepitude which our national defenses bore; everything had been apparently pared down to the exact border lino dividing cjliciency from inefficiency," I shall feel that no part of tho censure attaches to me and those associated with me in the administration of this depart ment. My representations that year were not re garded, and, as a consequence, repairs and improvements were to a oonsiderable extent suspended. A year after, and only a few weeks before leaving the department, I, in view of tbe injnry to tbe vessels and property in the yards, by reason of the inability to make needful repairs from want of funds, again -..11 .a a ri canru me attention oi ine in aval vjommniee artfi C!nncrrafl in ilia fnnta Tf waa mt winh that those who superseded me should be re- iioti u oi uie cuincniiios ana embarrassments which I had experienced for three years, and I closed a verv f nil and exrtlinit communica tion, of the 2!)th of January, one year ago, as iohowh: In order to ascertain how this immense and promised saving in feul is to be effected, it will be necessary to knew how much coal is consumed per annum, and at what cost. 1 have no account of the amount of coal annn- ally consumed in any one year, although I know about the quantity required for the navy, and can state the exact estimates for which appropriations have been asked since the return of peace. in my report, December, 1807, the esti mates for the then ensuing year were for -',ui)u tons, ine following year, December, 18C8, the estimates were for the next ensuing year 30,000 tons. A consumption of about 80,000 tons, or an average of r00 tons per steamer the estimate of the equipment bu reau met the wants of the service under the old system," as you term it. A contract was made in May, 1808 the last of which I have memoranda for 10,000 tons in Philadelphia at if :i ;!.'! per ton. But this was probably at a leRs rate than the average purchases, which are about four dollars; but even at five dol lars, which is sometimes paid, the cost for 80,000 tons a year's consumption would be ijfc 1.10,000. This is the sum total required for coal for steamers annually in time of peace; and from this amount, in consequence of having "given full sail power and having re rigged ' the steamers at great expense, you pledge yourself and declare "it can bo shown by figures" that you will make ' a saving of more than $ 2,000,000 per annum" in tho "sin gle item of coal alone, as consumed under the old system.' Sir, let me tell you that the interest of the money which has been expended by the Navy Department in excess of the appropriations since the 4th of March, much of it in chang ing the character of our naval vessels, with out the knowledge or consent of Congress, and I apprehend without consulting the naval constructors the interest of tho money on the excess of the expenditures over the an propriations since the 4th of March would vastly more than pay for the coal annually consumed by all the steamers in all our squad rons. Ine whole estimato for coal, transpor tation, storage, labor, etc., by the equipment bureau was If4 80,000. I have not yet had tho pleasure of seeing the estimates of tho Navy Department in do tail for the ensuing year, submitted to the present Congress. Whon they are published I shall be able to ascertain what reduction you have made or .propose to make in the quantity of coal consumed, after the large expenditure in changing the character of the vessels, giving them "full sail power" and "ship rig." Just so much as your estimate is less than ::o,oco tons will be the saving ef fected. If you have estimated for that quan tity or a larger quantity, it will be conclusive that you have no confidence in your own statement or in your questionable improve ments. I am satisfied in this caso, as well as in that of the advancement of officers and other particulars, you have failed to mako personal investigation, as is expected of one in so responsible a position, and that you have, in fact, no reliable data for many of your statements. I do not charge you with designedly practising an imposition on Con gress and the country, but you have permit ted yourself to-be imposed upon by a prompter who is careless of facts and makes reckless assertions. There is an obscurity in your financial ex hibit to which, while writing, I call your at tention, although there may have been de sign in making it obscure. The statement of expenses and estimates is not an exhibit of the fiscal year, as is usual, but is a blending of fractions of two years and two administra tions, and furnishes no definite or satisfac tory information of the transactions of the department. You omit to stato what were the expenditures for the fiscal year which terminates on the 80th of June. You omit to state the unexpended balances in the Treasury on the 1st of July, or what wore the available resources for tho current year, a,t that date. The appropriations for tho last fiscal year were' $ 17, 350, 850 "1H, but tho expenditure ex ceeded that amount several millions of dol lars. How much that excess is yon do not state, and it cannot be known without the usual exhibit, which is studiously suppressed. An attempt is made to divert attention by a statement that $27,880,058 was expended up to the 1st of December, but the Treasury year neither commences nor closes in Decem ber. The appropriations by Congress extend from the 1st of July to the 80th of June of the following year, when the Treasury balanoes are struck. Why have we not the usual exhibit for the fiscal year? Tbe country is entitled to it. The failure to present it and the substitute in its stead of parts of two fiscal years and of two administrations is not a satisfactory exhibit. The statement that "$7, 799,873 has been refunded to the Treasury" does not make the exhibit less obsoure Has such an amount been overdrawn ? If BO) for what purpose 't And. from what fund or appropriation was this sum equal to about one-half of the en tire naval appropriations for the current year refunded ? If it is made up of transfers or payments from one bureau to another, as presented in what is called an "exhibit of ex penditures," on the thirty-seventh page, it amounts to nothing; for what you call "re funding" is an absolute expenditure. If those who succeed me are embarrassed for the waut of vessels or means it shall be through no fault of mine; for it has been my endeavor that the wants of the service aud the true Inte rests of the country should be faithfully pre sented to Congress. In my annual report, as well as in special communications of the Naval Department and in this letter, my object has been aud is the wel fare of the service. It is a satisfaction to know that the department is not responsible for the perishing and uon-efllcleut condition of our naval vet-eels which remain at the wharves unfitted and unrepaired for service. These records are on the records of the de partment, and if you have not read them I respectfully commend them to your perusal. Congress, though fully informed of the con dition of the vessels and their deterioration, refused to make the required appropriations, and I, with my convictions of duty, had but one course to pursue, which was to limit the repairs within the means provided. A different course has been pursued since March last, and you think results will "fully justify the wisdom of its policy." I acted on no such prinoiple. The wisdom and correct ness of the recommendations in my annual report and in the communications to the Naval Committee and Congress I have never doubted. Your action has been in conformity to my recommendations, so far as needful repairs nave been maue, but J. would not wil I lingly expend the publio money, as has been 1 done for the last eight mouths, without au thority of law, certainly not in large expendi tures changing the character of the vessels; bnt the department seems at present to be governed by no such restraints. Yon make no allusion to my several recommendations to Congress, but state that yon have proceedod "to restore our small force to an effective condition" In "the shortest possible time;" and in an appendix you enumerate eighty-six vessels repaired and refitted for sea. A largo number of the vessels thns enumerated, which you take credit for having refitted, are new and have never mado a cruiRe. Your justification and great claim for these expenditures, made independently of Con gress, consist in the vaRt saving of "fuel." Vessels, you say, have been "given full sail power and reneged, so that they are inde pendent of steam. "Orders have been issued to the commandants of squadrons, directing them not to permit the consumption of coal for any purpose whioh could be as well per formed by sail." This is a mero repetition of an old regulation issued in 1805, after tho close of the war, and rigidly enforced, to which, however, you make no allusion, leav ing it to be inferred that it is a new regula tion, now for the first time issued. On the ninth page you make the extraordi nary statement: It can be shown by figures that this system of giving and requiring tho general use of lull sail power, beside its eff ect to make sailors of both officers and men, will, on tho vessels intended to be kept in commission, (calculating that they cruise but two-thirds of the time), make, lu the item of coal alone, as consumed under the old system, a saving of more than $2,000,000 per annum. Much has been said within the last six or eight months of the marvellous saving effected in the consumption and cost of fuel nnder tke new management of the Navy De partment, and now in your official report you give assurance that there is to be "in the item of coal alone, as consumed under the old system, a saving of more than $2,00,000 Eer annum." If any such remarkable saving as been made or is to be made, great credit is certainly due to those who have effected it, and great culpability should attach to the administration of the department under the "old system, if cuilty of the imputed waste I hold myself responsible for my aots, and you are responsible for the verity of your statements. The whole statement needs explanation The refunding fiction makes confusion, and is doubtless one of the reasons why the de partment evades a statement of the condition of affairs at the close of the fiscal year, in accordance with usage. The estimate submitted by me for naval expenses in December, 1808, amounted to $20,993,014. Congress reduced them $.",- 122,882, and appropriated 15,870,531. Your estimates for the ensuing year are for $28,205,071, or $7,212,250 more than was et-ked by me, and $12,335,135 more than Congress would authorize one year ago. This does not indicate retrenchment, a re duction of expenses, or creater economy, although yon represent that the expenditures made since March -aro by "tho books of tho Treasury" less than tho corresponding months one year ago, when old war contracts were being closed up and expenditures were not called "refunding," and although you declare you can show "by figures" a saving of more than $2,000,000 per annum in the item of coal alone. This letter has already extended beyond the limits intended, and without commenting on or criticizing other numerous errors, fal lacies, and exceptional matters, I shall close with th expression of a wish that in yonr 1 inure reports, or communications to news paper correspondents relating to me or my action, you will personally investigate and possess yourself of facts and avoid misstate ments and misrepresentations. My letter to Mr. OlHey was so distorted and falsified and its contents so soon mado publio after it passed into your possession, that I shall, to prevent further false interpretations, and for my own protection, make this letter to yon publio. Very respectfully, Gideon Welles. WINES AND LIQUORS. HER AIE8TY CHAMPAGNE. DUHTQX? & LUS30N. 215 SOUTH FKONT STREET. TBE ATTENTION OF THE TRADE IS solicited to the following very Onoioa Wine, etc., for sale by DUNTON k LUBSON, J15 BOOTH FRONT STREET. OHAMPAGNK8. Asents for ber Majesty. Dae U Montobello, Cart Blara, Carte Blanche, and Charles terra's Grand Vin Kugen.e, and Vra Imperial, M. Klee. man A Co., of alayenoe, fparklin. Moselle and KHINK WIUKS. MAI) KIR A 8. Old Isla.id, Booth Bide Reserve. - KUKRRIKU.-F. Kudulpbe, Amontillado, Topas, VaL lette, Vale and Golden Bar, V -, eto. 1'OH'I H. Vinho Velho Real, Vallotte, and Crown. CLARETS. from ia Aine A Cie., Montlerrand aad Bor deaux. Olareta and Kanterne Wines U I N. "Meder Bwan." BRANDIKS. Hennessey, Otard, Dnpny A Oo.'s variona vintaaea. 4 4 QA11STAIKS & McCALL, Nos. 136 WALNUT and 81 GRANITE Street. Imporrs of BRANDIKS. WINKS, GIN, OLIVE OIL, ETO., AND COMMISSION MERCHANTS For the sale of PURE OLD RYE, WHEAT, AND BOURBON WIUS- K1E8. I 2B M CAN STAIRS' OL1VK OII-AN INVOICE of tbe above for sale by CAR8TAIR8 A MrOALL, s28 8pf Nos. 126 WALNUT and 21 UKAN1TK KU. FURNITURE. RICHMOND & CO.. FIRST-CLASS FURNITURE WAREROOMS, No. 45 SOUTH SECOND BTREET, EAST BIDE. ABOVE OHESNUT. U6tf PHILADELPHIA LEOAL NOTIOE8. IN THE ORPHANS' COURT FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA. Estate of JOHN II. DRAPKU, deceased. The Auditor appointed by the Conrt to andit, settle, and adjuHt the aooount of EDMUND DKAFKR and ROBERT DBA FUR. trusters of JOHN II. DRAPER. un-Jer the will of JOHN DRAPER, deoeesed, and to reDort diatrilintinn of thm kalnnuA In the hands of the aooouutont, will meet the par- j una iiiLcresieu, i or uie purpose ox ois appointment, on MONDAY, January U, lBVU, at 4 o'olook P. M., at his olfloe. southeast corner of WALNUT and SIXTH Streets (second Hour), in the city af Philadelphia. - HENRY S. HAGERT. lUwfmfSt Aaditor. "INSTATE OF WILLIAM CHRISTIE, DE- A J CEASED. Letters of Administration A. . . . a. upon the estate of the above-named decedent having been ranted to the requested to' make payment, and thoee having claims or , demands against Uie same a same with out delar. to iiKnKY WKIOIir. omueiay. . No. 1615 GIRA RD Avenue; Or to hit Attorney, BAMUEL O. PERKINS, 121uf6s No. 627 WALNUT Street. o NE DOLLAR GOODS FOR 95 CENTS. EMPIRE 8 LATE MANTEL WORKS. J. Bl MJMMM le. 11 WlilfflWX fett t. ASk&bJ 1 PROPOSALS. )UwiVArrirOK BTAM1'KD KNVKLurjifj and Post Officii Dktaiitmrnt, January 10, lmaf Scaled rrfPOnlS will be received nnttl 8 P. If. on the lot ilny of MARCH, 1810, for fnrnl.ih.lnir all the "Stamped KnvelOieo" tml "Newopnper Wrap pers - wnivn mm jjrpiirinicuv may require nil run a penou oi jour rears, uuiuiubiiciuk iei oi Out;, nTAF rfill ENVKIAJl'KH. No. 1. Koto aize. iji by v laches, of whlw rrer. no. g. ordinary letter mzo, 8 1-18 by B?; inches, of white, bun", ranarv. or creani- colored paper, or In suxh Proportion of either as may be requited. No. 8. Full letter olzn fnno-nmmed on nun. foi rircuiare), o ny dj Irenes, of tlio oamo colors jno. g, ana nouer a like condition as to the propor tion vi No. 4. Full letter size, 8V bv BV Inches, of oamfl cuiore an , mm uuuur tt line condition 8 10 IUO proportion or eacn. No. 6. Kxtra letter size (unmimmed on flan, for t'lrcuinns), "T "i oi eauiH colors aa jno. 8, and under a like condition as to the proportion 01 each. No. t. Extra letter size, B v by 6 V Inches, of same colors as No. S, and under a like condition aa to the proportion or eacn. No. T. Olllclal size, B' by 8? Inches, of same colors as No. , and under a liko condition as to the, proportion or each. No. a Extra ottlclal size, i4 bv 9'i laches, of same colors as No. 8, and nnder a like condition m lo the proportion or car.n. NEWSPAi'HK WRAPPERS. 6)4 by 9)4 Inches, of burl or nianilla paper. aii the auove envelopes aiui wrappers to na em boosed with postage stamps of such denominations, styles, and colors, aud to bear such printing on the face, and to be made in the most thoroiiKh manner,' of paper of approved quulliy, manufactured specially for the purpose, with such water marks or other de Vices to prevent Imitation as tbe Postinastcr-Ucncraij may direct. The envelopes to be thoroughly and perfectly summed, the gumming on the flap of each (except lor circulars) to oe put on not leos titan rmir an men In width the entire lcrjgth. The wrappers to bo' gummed not Icbs than turee-fourths of an inch. In wiuin across ine end. All envelopes and wrappers must be banded In parcels of twcuty-flve, and packed In Btroup. than two hundred aud fitly of the letter or extra letter size, and one thuudred each of tho om cial or extra oillclnl size, separately. The news paper wrappers to be pocked In boxes to contain not less than two hundred and fifty each. The boxes are to be wrapped and sealed, or seenrelv fastened In strong manllla paper, so as to safely beor transportation by mail for delivery to lostmasters. W hen two thousand or more enve opes are required to till the order of a postmaster. tho ttraw or pasteboard boxes containing the seine uniht ue packed in strong woouen cases, well strapped with hoop-Iron, and addressed; out wnen leas mim two inousana are required. proper labels of directum; to be furnished by an agent or uie jjcparuneni, mum oe piacea upon eacn package by the contractor. Wooden easel, con taining envelopes or wrappers to be transported by water routes, must be provided with suitable water-proofing. The whole to be done under the Inspection and direction ot an agent of the XH'puniiieuu The envelopes and wrappers must be famished and delivered with all reasonable despatch, complete In all respects, ready for use, and In such quantities us nwy lie required to till the dally orders of post masters; the deliveries to be made either at the Post Oillce Department, NVuphLngton, D. C, or at the oitlce or an agent duly authorized to Inspect and re ceive the same; tho place of delivery to be at the option of the Postmubter-Qeneral, and the cost of il ..! I '.-. ii I. no W..II aa all a wanaa " n.-.lflni -1 dressing, labeling, and water-proofing, to be paid by ine contractor. Bidders are notllled that the Department will re quire, as a condition of the contract .that the en velopes and wrappers shall be manufactured and stored in such manner as to ensure securltf atrainab loss by lire or theft. The manufactory must at all times be subject to the lnspeetion of an agent of the Department, wno win require ine stipulations 01 the contract to be lalthfully observed. 'I he dies for embossing the postage scamps on the envelopes and wrappers are to be executed to the satisfaction of the i'OBtmastcr-General, In the best style, and they are to be provided, renewed, and kept In order at the expense of the contractor. The department reserves the right of requiring new dies for any stamps, or denominations of stamps not now used,, and any changes of dies or colors shall be made without extra charge. - Specimens of the stamped envelopes and wrap pers now In use may be seen at any of the principal post ofllces. but these specimens are not to be re garded as the style aud quality axed by the depart ment as a standard for the new contract; bidders are therefore Invited to submit samples of other and different qualities and styleB, Including the paper proposed as well as the manufactured en velopes, wrappers, and boxes, and make their blda accordingly. The contract will be awarded to the bidder whose proposal, although It be not the lowest, Is con sidered most advantageous to the Department, taking into account the prices, quality of the sam ples, workmanship, and the sufllcioncy - and ability of the bidder to manufacture and deliver Uie envelopes and wrappers lu accordance with the te.rms of thla ndvertiHementr nnd nn nrnnnunl will be considered unless accompanied by a suillclentX ana sausiaciory guarantee. Tne rostmaster-oene-ral also, reserves the right to reject any and all bids, If In lift Judgment the interests of the Uoveramont require It. , 1 Jkfur closing & contract the successful bidder may be required to prepare new dies, and submit Impressions thereof. Tub uhk of tub i-hbsknt Diisa MAY OK MAY NOT HE CONTINUED. Bonds, with approved and sufficient sureties, In the sum of fioo.ooo, will be required for the faithful performance of the contract, as required by Uie seventeenth section of the act of Comrress. annroved the Stith of AugUBt, 1848, and payments under said contract win ue maue quarterly, alter proper ad justment of accounts. The Postmaster-General reserves to hlmsolf the right to annul the contract whenever the same, or any part thereof, la ottered for sale for tbe purpose of speculation ; and nnder no circumstances will a transfer of the contract be allowed or sanctioned to any party who shall be, in the opinion of the Pestiuasver-Ueneral, less aide to fnltill the condi tions thereof than the original contractor. The right Is also reserved to annul the contract for a failure to perforin lalthfully any of its stipulations. Tho number of en vt lopes of different sizes, and of wrappers Issued to Postmasters during the fiscal year ended June 80, 169, was as follows, vis. : No, 1. Note size l,iu,0u0. No. 2. Ordinary lttior size; (not iieretofore used). No. I. Full letter size, (ungumrsod, for circulars) No. 4. Full letter size 6T.86T.B00. Wo. o. Kxtra letter size, (uDgumraed, for circulars) No, 6. Extra letter size 4 204,600 Na T. Orlloial size 404,660. No. & Kxtra olllclal size 1700. Wrappers 8,696,260. fl UidH xhoilld ha ar,orelv onvAlnnnri ami I marked "Proposals for HUniped Envelopes aua 'Wrappers," and addressed ti the Third Asslstaut Postmaster-General, Post Office Department, Wash ington, D. C. JOHN A. J. CHKSWKtX, 1 11 eodtMl Postmaster General.' PROPOSAIJI TOlli PURCHASE OF RIFLED CANNON, KTU. . Bureau of Ordkanck, set, 1 MKNT, V ' 4, 1870. INAVT 1JEPAKTM Washington City. January Sealed Proposals for the purchase of 80-pounder and 80-pounder Parrott Hides, with Carriages, Im plements, and Projectiles, now on hand In the Navy Yards at Portsmouth, N. H. : Boston. New Tort-. Philadelphia, Washington, and Norfolk, will be re-1 -ceivea at mis isureau unm i o ciock noon, Jannari Ul, JOIVl , JB1U. I In the aggregate there are about 890 Guns, 864 Car- J jges, and a,lB7 Projectiles. Schedules In detail ot J collides at each yard will be furnished onappll- rlnges, tbe ail cation to this Bureau, Bidders will state the number of guns, carriages. Implements, and projectiles they desire to purchase at each yard separately,-specifying the calibre of gun, kind of carriage, whether broadside or pivot, aud the kind of projectiles. The guns, eta, will be delivered at the respec tive navy yards, and roust be Temoved by the pur chaser or purchasers within ten days after the ac ceptance of his or their bid. But no deliveries will be made of any article until the parties purchasing shall have deposited with the paymaster of the navy yard the full amount of the purchase money in eaca case. Many of the guns are new, and all are service able. Bidders will therefore oifer accordingly. No offer for these articles as old Iron or wood will lie -considered. The Bureau reserves the right to reject any or all ' bids which it may not consider to the Interest of the Government to accept. Proposals should be endorsed on the envelope -"Proposals for Purchase of Killed Cannon, etc." A. LUULUVV CASK, . J 8W S7t Chief of B ii reuu. CTETrjSO, llJUO.. & CO. OlfiB, Ul3a na,13aB.S0OMBb.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers