Mr. FOSTER. I believe I do, though I cannot say that I know it in such a sense that I should be qualified to testify to it before a court of justice. So far as my own opinion is concerned I think I do know who the author is. That, however, is not the point; for the honorable Senator has informed us that the question is as it regards the quotations read from the pamphlet and not who the man who wrote the pamphlet was. In the light of that information which the honorable Senator kindly gave me, I read also the opinion of Admiral Joseph Smith upon this same subject, which the SecyNavy had the benefit of, besides the opinion of the board selected by him, and the opinion of Commodore Pendergrast. admiral Joseph Smith, after a personal examination of League Island in 1863, said of it: “Some of the objections to which [to League Isl and] are of so serious a character as to be at once discoveredby the mostsuperficial observer.’ Again, the ComNavAffrs of the HoRep in 1864, reported “That the public interest would not be promoted by its selection, some of the objections seeming to your committeeinsuperable.” I thus give you the conclusion of the board of officers selected by the SecyNavy himself, and so selected that no charge of prejudice or bias against League Island can properly be made as against them who reported that this island is unfit and improper for these purposes. I have also given the letter of Commodore Pendergrast, and the opinion of Admiral Joseph Smith. This last named officer, from his age and experience in the Navy, from his position as chief of the Bureau of Yards and Docks, is entitled to much consideration. It may be safely affirmed that when he is called upon to examine a subject of this sort he will understand it thoroughly, and he adds his high sanction to the objections which that board and Commodore Pendergrast had made to League Island. Then the ComNavAffrs of the HoRep, who went personally upon the ground and made the examination for themselves, made their report condemning it alto gether. And yet the honorable Senfrom Indiana, and the honorable Senfrom Iowa, say that the SecyNavy still recommends, and has for half a dozen years recommended and urged upon Congress the selection of League Island. Sir, in view of these facts, I would ask why he does it, what reason is there for it? Can the Senate see any such reason as should cause them to pay heed to the request? Is not the evidence overwhelmingly against League Island, giving to the recommendation of the Secretary all the weight that it should ever be entitled to?" Ought we not to rely upon the reports of boards of officers who were sent there on purpose to examine the site, upon the testimony of the commander of the yard there, of the chief of the Bureau of Yards and Docks, of the committee of the HoRep who went there and made a personal examination? Ought we not to take testimony of that sort as immeasurably higher than the opinion of the SecyNavy, which after all may have been inspired by the “NewEngland man” who wrote that pamphlet? I do not say that it was; but I say it is possible. ten “by a NewEngland man, ” and the Secretary is from NewEngland, a thing greatly in his favor; and the man who wrote this pam phlet manifestly thought it would give currency and strength to his opinions by placing “by a NewEngland man” on the title page. Lest the honorable Senfrom Minnesota should be misled, as he seemed to think this was one of the pamphlets which he had read in favor of NewLondon, let me say to him that this is a pamphlet in favor of League Island, and that there may be no mistake about it, and no misunderstanding on this point, I will read the title page: “Advantages of LeagueIsland for a naval station, dock yard, and fresh water basin for iron ships and other vessels of war, as thorities, recommendedby public au with all the objectionsheretoforeofficially advanced, substantially or textually reproducedand severally answered.” Now comes the astounding phrase: “By a NewEngland man. Published by the board of Trade of Philadelphia. Philadelphia: Sherman & Co., Printers, 1866.’ Now, Mr. President, it is quite possible that the author of that pamphlet, a NewEngland man, inspired the SecyNavy with the opinion that League Island was after all, 1st and last, the best place for a naval station. But is it so? And is the opinion of the SecyNavy under these circumstances to weigh a feather against these contrary opinions? I think I can show by docu mentary evidence of the highest authority that this League Island, so far from being a desirable location for a navy yard and naval station, is about one of the most unfit points that could be selected on our whole coast from Eastport to Cape Florida. It is writ And I have no question. that it will cost more money to prepare properly League Island for a naval station and depot than to construct and complete all the works necessary for such an establishment at a fit and eligible site. That is my 1st objection. My next objection to League Island is that when completed it is a most unfit and ineligible site for the purpose contemplated, the objections to it being permanent and fatal. this on these 2 propositions that I oppose this bill. But the amendment of the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts leaves League Island with all its advantages, if it has them, to be examined by the gentleman named in the amendment together with other sites alon the coast, and they are to make a selection. the best site. Is there anything unfair, anything which should be excepted to in that proposition? If League Island i. advantages over other points, will not Admiral Farragut, Gen. eral Sherman, and Mr. Hilgard be as ready to discover and appreciate those advantages as even the honorable Senfrom Indiana or the honorable Senfrom Iowa or the SecyNavy himself? I say there is no conflict of testimony; it is all on one side; there is not a shadow on the other. There was a suspicion of testimony on the other side, but on examination it proved to be a shadow. If, however, we go on the ground that there is a conflict of testimony, is it not perfectly safe to leave the decision to men such as are named in the amendment? The honorable Senator. from Indiana went into a calculation to show what the amount of filling was which would be requisite on that Island, and what would be its cost. I do not know whether he read this from the letter of the Asst Secretary, Mr. Fox, or from the text of the pamphlet.