Mr. Charles A. Dana. then Asst SecyWar. without notifying me. Mr. Conkling appointed toinvestigateall fraudsin enlist mentsin western NewYork, with the stipulation that he should be commissionedjudge advocate for the prosecutionof any casesbrought to trial and he was so appointed to prosecute.before a general court martial. Major J. A. Haddock. Mr. Dann vested him, by several orders issued in the name of the SecyWar. without the sanctionoi Mr. Stanton, with the most extraordinary powers. Amour thesewas the right to examine the dispatches In nl telegraph officesin the Western division of NewYork. which enabled a violation of the sanctity of personal and basiness correspondence.For his services in this conneetion Mr. Conkling received.on the 9thof Novemher last. from the U.S. the modest feeof $3.000.Whether he received as it has been reportai from hisdistrict $5.000 morefor the Same service.an whether he received additional fees from guilty articl for opposing proceedingsat Utica., aiii unab s new to say. but, ashereatter shown. he was as perilousin preventing prosecutions at Utica ashewasin makina themat Elmirar and the main ground of dilhculty betweenMr.Couklin and myself has beenthat I wanted exposureat both 1) aces while hewanted concealment at one. Isupposu there can be no doubt nine n liiglr minded merias to the character of Mrt (kip lings coursein this matter. Whether his action in exor cure the functions of iudge advocateand receiving ere or from the U.S. to the amount of.(XXw) hile receivini: his compensationasamember ofOon css was a violation of the letter or spirit or both O article 1, section two. of the Constitution. I cave others to decide. to the animal of Mr. Conklings caliimnions assault upon me it is true (notwithstanding his assertionthat he had no personal quarrels with me) that the dilemnce s between him and myse lf arose altogether from my lllWllllngnlrrlto gratify him in certain matters in which he had a strong personal interest. It is truc.also.thn.t ho was foiled in his efforts to obtain undue concessions from my bureau and to discredit me in the eyesof my There have been 3 main issue8s 08eot1w1coe"n. Mr. Conkling and myself. the jirstorose in consequenceof the removal of Captain Richardson. (the 1st provost marshal of Mr. Cenkhngs district.) uponureport ofJudge Advo cate Turner. that the proofs in his case discloseda reckless persistence in fraudulent practices. Mr. Qonkling complained of my action both to the Pros ident and WarDept.but failed to procure any modification of my course. The 2nd issuewas as to the restoring of Captain Crundall, (the 2nd provost marshal of the district.) after I had securedhis removal from duty on the recommendation of Maior Ludington who thoroughly inspected the district and reported that though not legallyguilty he liud morally perpetrated a mostglaring and lDEXOuflllblGhand on the Guvernment he wassworn to nerve.a nd that he had quieted his conse ienceby castiistry and regulated his actions by the coun elof unse rupulous legal advisers. Mr. Qonkling failed to ctUaptaineriiiidnll restoredmnd tnc officers elected y me continued in chargeof the businessuntil the otheewase losed. The3rd isiicivnsastothi Governaients employing counsel to defendeanniiii Ciundullatterhehad been relieved and had conmil with him. in violation of the orders of the Dept. some 20,000 dollars. local ty deposited with him in beliult of recrui and in regarillo which hegot into litigation. In this Mr. Uonklinir failed. Counsel has not. to my knowledge. been authorized.nor have any lawyers been paid by the Government in that suit. In supportofliisrleniiilofdifferences with mcwhich uitluenced his action Mr. Oonkling states the fact thatwc bad butonc persenalinterview. Thatis true. but itproves the reverse of what Mr. Conliling nsserts. for it wasof suclra nature as to render other interVicws very objectionable. I wase alled to Mr.Danas Office to haven. verbal discussion with Mr. Conkling on the questions at nuue. but I had by this time learned too much of this gentlemanto transact bus lness With hiui in that way and I declined to do so. Wehad.diieetlyiind indirectly niuch correspondence and generally of an unpleasant character and I presume under such eirciimstances it will begranted that mens personal relations will be bad although they myobtnotyhsshtuanddbin giitonMerp. erUsoonnkalliinnitzesrvideewn.ial i.n the House. his own letters as well as the foregoingstatements show that there were differences and that he was "worsted" 0n the251hof October.1865h, ewrote the Secrctaryof Wansayi “It now manymonthssince have beenable to obtain any responsefrom the Dept touching the in termts of the Government in this District. Still I venture one morotrial." de. Mr. Conkling warts and resents its s an offense or crime on my part that ajor lladdoclg was my erony, confidant. &c and thatIjustilied him(llud dock) down to the time when his sentence was published and afterward. Thuso assertionsare not true. Major Haddock was never my confidant or erony. Prior to his entry into the Veteran BSOIVEcorpsI had never heard of him. He was appointed to that corps by a special order from the SecyWar without any knowledge or action ou in art. lfe served under General Oakes, in Illinois. y whom he was highly recommended to me. Hetlwn served for a short time in asubordinate POSHIOH in a bi iiiich omf y office without my becom mg intimate ivith liiiii. personally or officially. He has never madea social or personal call on mein his life. He was highly recommendedby the officerunder whom he served in my office and was selected for a temporary provost marshalship in Pennsylvania. where he renilered eflicient service without bis integ natsyloorrctatpimaeeitWy ithbeffidnegl Qiuestion reads. IAkftneorwsearsvianegtfinerg provost marshal at Buffalo. he wasselectedasacting asst provost marshal general.at Elmira. for the rememand that only. that I thoughthe was upriht and suited to the position. In that position I e friended and sustained him until I hllidJHO er evidence of his being unworthy and not a ay n er; but on this point I required better testimonytion Hon. Rose oe(loiililin. I receiveda letter dated as late as March 29.1560f.rom llon. Hamilton Ward. member of Congressof the district in which Major Haddock wasstationed.claiming to befamiliarvrith Hadilocks course and the motivesof the persons operating against mm. “and protesting against his removalz" but notWithiitanding this. as soon iis the oficial report againsthim was reecived.on the st of i nAvpersilt.i glahtiaodn.him relieved and his conduct put under lle had not then been 4 months on duty as acting asstpro out marshal general. After his trial and disiniesul aiorHadd ck came to Washington to get a revocation or me fieation of bl! sentence. He pointed out to me instances of unfairness in h istrial. but I declined to do anything in aid of his obJect.as I thought he deserved punishment not for all the crimes with which Mr. (look chargulhimeiut for the offenseeof which he was real guilty. even refused to give bima letter as to his clisvier prior to his beingaccused.because I I knew that such a letter. though perhe e notwrong in Illelf. would be used to accomplis a purpose which I did not approve. namely. his pardon. Major Huddock went on duty at lilniira as acting asstprovost marshal general, December 9, laid. An inspection madeat my request the latter part of March. 1565.elicited the 1st information which I receivedsuitable for proceedingagainst him. I received the report on the let of April and on the someday I submitted it to the SecyWar. with the recommendation that Mu ior Haddock be relieved from duty as acting asst provostmar shal general of western NewYork and that his conductbe further investigated which wasapproved by the SecyWar, and Mine r Haddock was promptly relieved. The prosecution of Major Haddock was on April 3 1565m, ade the special business of Mr. Conklingand the Judge Advnoutctieneral f the Army. asshownby a letter from Mr. CharlesA. Dana. Asst SecyWar. But whenever I had an opportunity. so far as I had power. I urged forward the trial of Major fladdock. I was told by Mr. Dana. early in April. that Mr. Conklini: would preparecharges. but hearing nothing definite in regard to themI. on the 22dof April. 1865.wrote to Mr. Conkling asking when he would be readyto proceedWith the trial. to which I received a replli; saying that he had for warded the charges to the SecyWar. This letter I at once (. ay lst) referredtothe Judge Advocate General, with the request that the trial might take place assoonaspossible.The court wasordered to conveneon the 17thof May. 1865. hotuithstanding Mr. Conkling was directed togethis instructions from General Holt. lie frequentlyapplied to me. On the 15thof May I referre a letter from him of the 13thwith the following indorsement: “Respectfully referred to the Judge Advocate General. with the requestthat he will answer Mr. Conkliii rsingumes by tclegraph to diiy. as the court meets i iy after tomorrow. Mr. Cciiltling is judge advocate of the court and I recommendthat all properauthority and flieiiities be grantedto him at once.” when the organizationof the court wasdelayed by the absence of members I secured at once the detail of other officers and notified Mr. Conkling hy telegraph. There are other factsbearing on this point. but the foregoing are. I think, sufficient to show my desire to haveMajor llndilock tried. Mr. conkliniz. in his speech.insinuates dishonesty. saying this bureau should “allow the War Dept and the countryto line wprecisel what hushe comcof the 25 million and 0d dollars which, under the act of March 3.18133. wentot its credit. My official report. now partly in the hands of the Public Printer. shows in detail the disposition of every dollar of this money and shows. moreover. a completeness and accuracy in accounts that is not surpasse d, if it is e iialed. by any bureau under the Governmetnt.:iiirl I old acertificate from the 2nd Creolmatpintgrotloletrhiosffuthned hTaevaesubreyen that all my accounts examined and found correct. Mr. Conkling speaksof this bureau allowing the War Dept to know. the" as if they were separate branches of the Government. My bureau 1:41s], ubordinatebranch of the “War Dept and I Wishhere to point out clearly the fact that my business has beenconductedunder the constant supervision and direction of the SecyWar and those authorized to act in his name. It ought not to be necessary for me to remind either Mr. Conkling or the “people” that Mr. Stanton has never beenuiiwillinir to make examinationsinto the conduct of his subordinates. nor slow to act upon the result of them. This of itself is a suficienhreply to Mr. Conklinir! abuse of me. Especially as it a fact that everyrequest.complaint or accusationof any importance made by him to or affecting this bureau hasbeenlaid before the SecyWar and passed upon by him. It is true that the result has in nearly every instance been unfavorable to Mr. Conkling; and assuming that these were the differences or quarrels which were referredto in the debate asthose in which Mr. Conkhng came out “2nd best." he asserted what wasnot true when he denied them. Mr. Conkling says that he may hereafter inform Congress what number of i illthe men who received bounty reached the front. intimating that.the proportion was sniall. I. for one. should be glad to obtain that information. The duty of ding men to the front rested withthe Aihutant general of the Army and not With me. l lealso hints that he may hereaftermake a dam Mlniclpolde of the operationsof my bureau whatever e may adduee in this connection he Will proh ably not be able to disprove that it raisedmore than a million men for the Army. which. when hostilitiui ceased.(:OnSlStOLnIo, twithstanding all the losses.of one million 516 men: that jt arrested and returnedto the service over 76,000 deserters and that it raised by llr! own operations in conorinity to law. over 26 million dollars, which sum has been properly disposed of. lhiit there were frauds in my branchofthe SOP vice I admit but that they prevailed to a greater degreein it than in others or that earneatand soul ous Odorts were not made by me to pursue.correct and punish them.no man dare have the hardihood o asse Mr and I will here state that the fraud or lossin governmentfunds under my bureau.including both that punished and that unpunished. has been compara tiwly small. The frauds and malpractices which did occur were almost entirely in connection with l cal bounties. could not be controlled by the U.S and WhlclltOITUPI NsIome of the officers of this bureau but more ol the fieople at largc. includin superVise rs. agents, &c. selected by the people to isbiirso the funds which they so lavishly bestowed. Thee generel management of my business has recciv the approve of all dispassionate parties who havehad an opportunity to Judge of it. including the late President and that superior officer to whom I have been directly resiionsible.wlitise v or and whose capacity and opportunity to judge are cyond dispute; and it will not belorgotten that complunts an accusationshave been spreadWith great industribeforethe high officials last referred to. have been atalltimes amenable to the severest form of law – the military cede liable at any momont to summary arrest court martial and extreme run ishment in case of any dereliction of official duty. No one knew or knows this fact better than Mr. Conklin, and if. while acting uie in a advocate. under the extraordinary inquisitoria Powers he stowe upon him by his friend Mr. Dana. he came into the possession of any fact impugning or imDEBEHHD? my integrity as a public O ieer. he was guilty O grave public wrong and unfaitbfulness if e did not instantly filovformal charges ainst me with the SecyWar. He can. there ore. only ceca e the eha e of deliberateand malignant false boo as a mom or of Congressby confeannu an unfiardonable breach of duty as, iud e advocate. Ho emboth offices and took pay for 0th at the same time: he hase certainly been in so to honorm one, and perhaps as the se ucl may show. in both. Copies of china documents sxbstantialing statements herein made are suboine. I am. 51:.very respectfidly. )t.tyingfii.ligfllfi servant. Provost general. Hon. Janus G. Beams. HoRep WashingtonD.C.