War and Mr. Blair, the Postmaster General; neither of whom used any expression which implied a restriction of power. On the contrary, the drift of the conversation was to the effect that I should exercise any power required. I have heard that the President said to the Illinois delegation-to Mr. Trumbull, perhaps that he had given me more power than he had himself. I would like to remark, in passing, that I do not think it was clearly understood what was the nature of the power which a general commanding a department had.

By the chairman :

Question. All the powers incident and necessary to carry out the object to be obtained were given?

Answer. That is precisely the point.

By Mr. Gooch:

Question. Did you appoint military officers to act under you; and if so, why, and by virtue of what authority?

Answer. I did appoint such officers, and because they were necessary to the proper organization of the army, and the carrying out of the military operations. I did it under the authority of the Secretary of War and of the President of the United States, and under the general authority given to me.

Question. Do I understand that it was expected that, when you left Washington to assume the command of your department, you would exercise that power?

Answer. If I thought of it at all, I did. The governor of Missouri hesitated to appoint officers for the force raised in Missouri. A despatch was sent to the President or through a cabinet officer to the President-asking him if he would confirm the officers appointed by me; to that effect, I think. At all events, the President replied that he would do so. And in all cases when I appointed officers they were appointed subject to the confirmation of the President; to be commissioned by him; so the commissions ran that I gave them. If the President approved the appointments, then they were to receive their commissions. Their appointment was necessary to the organization of the force in that department. We had to take officers wherever we could find them throughout the country.

Question. When you left Washington for your department you knew, of course, that you would find a great deficiency of arms in the department. Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. And you had an order for 7,000 stand of arms in New York?
Answer. I had procured the order here.

Question. Will you state the facts in relation to that order?

Answer. I learned from the governor of Illinois that 7,000 of the Illinois contingent were unarmed. I went to the War Department and applied for arms for them. General Thomas went with me to Colonel Ripley, and he agreed to let me have 7,000 out of the number on hand, which, I think, was 25,000. He was to send them to three different points, named by me, on the Illinois river. I went on to New York, and the second day after reaching there I received a letter from Colonel Ripley to the effect that he thought the governor of Illinois was mistaken, and that those arms were not required, and, therefore, the order had not been issued for them. I sent that letter to Washington, and in reply I received a despatch informing me that the President would, himself, go to the War Department and arrange the matter for me. And in pursuance of that Major Hagner was sent to New York to endeavor to procure arms for the western department. I subsequently received an order for 5,000 muskets, to be delivered to me from the St. Louis arsenal, but they were not there. I think, when I got to St. Louis, the arms of all descriptions in the arsenal then did not exceed 1,200 or 1,300.

Question. What force did you find subject to your control upon your arrival at St. Louis ?

Answer. I found a nominal force of perhaps 25,000 men, but a real force not exceeding 15,000 men; what I mean by that is, that of the three months men, whose terms of service were just expiring, so that you could not count upon them at all; there were about 10,000 men; while of the three years' men who were either in Missouri or going to it, there were, perhaps, 15,000 men. The two would make about 25,000 men.

Question. How was the force armed?

Answer. It was armed with all kinds of arms; some with rifled guns, and some with smooth bores. A small body of cavalry, of regular cavalry, I think, were armed with sabres.

Question. Was the whole of this force in possession of arms that could be used in the field?

Answer. I suppose they were, all except 7,000, for which, as I have before stated, I had no arms at all.

Question. When you were in New York was your attention called to what has since been known as the Austrian muskets?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did you examine them?

Answer. I looked at them. How far I examined them I do not recollect. Question. Did you form an opinion of them at the time?

Answer. I probably did.

Question. Can you state what that opinion was?

Answer. I cannot state the opinion from recollection. I can state what I suppose the opinion must have been. I probably did not take the muskets then, because they differed somewhat from the arm in regular use in our service. Question. Were those arms subsequently purchased?

Answer. Yes, sir; probably the same arms.

Question. Purchased in pursuance of your order?

Answer. By my direct order.

Question. To whom was your order given for the purchase of those arms? Answer. I purchased them by telegraph from St. Louis, addressed to a firm in New York, Kruse, Drexel & Schmidt, the firm that held them. They offered me the arms, and after some interchange of despatches I purchased them.

Question. What was the price agreed to be paid for them?
Answer. I think it was $6 50.

Question. Will you state the reason for purchasing those arms after having seen them and considering that there were some objections to them?

We were en

Answer. Because I was in very pressing need of arms. We had no arms to furnish the regiments. We had plenty of men, but no arms. deavoring to send re-enforcements to different points to meet the enemy in the field. We wanted arms for the troops to send to General Lyon, and for all our military operations.

Question. There were 25,000 of those arms?

Answer. Yes, sir. 13,000 new and 12,000 that had been in service.

Question. Was not your first proposition to purchase a part of them only? Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. What was the reason that that was not done?

Answer. Because they would not sell to me without selling the whole of them; and I was afraid to wait long, because I supposed they would go to some other quarter to sell them.

Question. At that time was there not a great competition in the market for arms ?

Answer. There was; at least I could get none. And in my judgment there could not have been-probably would not occur during the war-a greater ne

cessity for arms than there was then. We were pressed in the State of Missouri, and about there, by the enemy. We had men, but no arms to give them. The troops sent there by the States came there unarmed.

Question. What proved to be the character and quality of these arms, as you learned after receiving them?

Answer. They proved to be a good, substantial arm. The German troops, a number of whom had been accustomed to use that particular arm, preferred them-were well satisfied with them. When the question of altering them came up, General Asboth asked me to let him have them unaltered for his division, as he preferred them in that way. They were strong; the barrels were thick, so that they could be easily rifled, and those that were altered were rifled. The only difference between that arm and our arm consisted in this: that instead of having a nipple upon which to put a percussion cap, there was a primer to be put in, something like three-quarters of an inch long. A cover was opened, the primer put in, and the cover shut down, precisely as in the old flint-lock musket you threw back the battery, poured in the powder for priming, and shut down the battery or pan again. I have seen it stated that the ammunition was different. The cartridge was exactly the same as for our musket. The only difference was, that instead of putting on a percussion cap, you put in a primer of the same material as the percussion cap.

Question. Then it is not true that the ammunition used must be different? Answer. Not at all, except in using a primer instead of a cap.

By the chairman :

Question. Which could be handled in the shortest time, our gun or that kind? Answer. I should think there was very little difference between them in that respect. The primer was long, and the cap is short and small. I should think that when a man's fingers were cold he could more readily handle the primer, three-quarters of an inch long, than to handle the cap. There were no more motions to go through with in the one case than in the other. There was one advantage: this cover shut down with a spring over the primer, so that it protected it from getting wet.

By Mr. Gooch:

Question. So that after the primer was put in, it remained protected and fit for use for almost any length of time?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. And the hammer struck on the primer cover?

Answer. Yes, sir.

By Mr. Chandler:

Question. The hammer came down upon the cover of the primer as it used to strike the steel in the old-fashioned flint-lock musket?

Answer. Yes, sir.

By Mr. Gooch:

Question. And the compression ignited the powder, as in the case of the percussion cap?

Answer. Yes, sir; a regular percussion hammer came right square down on the cover of the primer. I had with me an excellent officer, Colonel Albert, who had been for years in the Austrian service. He said that in that service they considered it a good weapon. I think he used a stronger expression than that, but I will stop with that.

Question. Did you have with them the primer, so that they could be used? Answer. Yes, sir. When the muskets first got out there the primers did not come with them. Two boxes of primers were sent out first, but, in consequence

of careless handling, they exploded somewhere near Pittsburg, and killed some two or three men, and that caused some delay.

Question. How long after you received the guns before you received the primers?

Answer. I do not know. Perhaps some ten days.

Question. Were any of those guns put in use in your army without any alteration being made in them?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. How many of them?

Answer. I think it was so arranged that probably 15,000 of them were distributed or subject to distribution, I think, were distributed, and 10,000 of them were set aside for alteration. The understanding was, that as fast as they were altered they should be distributed to the troops, and those that were unaltered recalled, so as to gradually get them all altered.

Question. Were they all altered?

Answer. I think not. I think the house in Cincinnati that had contracted to alter them refused to alter any more after my removal, from fear they would not get their pay. They had made arrangements to alter them at first at the rate of 200 a day, and then to increase it to 500 a day; and I was informed they had reached the point of 500 a day at the time of my removal, when they stopped work upon them.

Question. So that, previously to the alteration, you considered them an effi

cient arm?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. What was the cost of the alteration.

Answer. Between four and five dollars; four dollars and a half, I think. Question. The gun having been altered, and having then cost the government eleven dollars, what was the value of the weapon then?

Answer. It would cost the government eleven dollars.

Question. Would it be a good arm at that price?

Answer. I should call it a thoroughly good arm at that price. It became then a rifled percussion musket of our pattern.

Question. Do you know the previous history of these muskets?

Answer. No, sir. All that I have seen about that is in the published report of the investigating committee of the House of Representatives. In respect to these muskets, I have a letter here, written to one of my staff from St. Louis, under date of January 21, 1862. The letter is written by Captain Hoskin, and this is what he says about these muskets: "Apropos of the long stories concerning the Austrian muskets, &c., which were so freely circulated in the newspapers, it is a very curious commentary on their alleged want of value, that I was last week ordered to go to Benton barracks, on the suggestion of Colonel Callender, to prove some of those very muskets, which had been issued to the troops. I need not say to you that the trial was a very conclusive one, and that two regiments, armed with them, marched next day for Cairo. The men had heard enough against those arms to make them feel very unwilling to take them; but, after the proving and trial, I judge they were very much better satisfied, Indeed, if it were not for these same despised weapons many of the regiments would have still remained unarmed; for the department of Missouri has been much neglected in that respect, as well as the department of the west, with a fair opportunity to solve the old task-work riddle of making bricks without straw."

By Mr. Odell:

Question. How many of these 25,000 Austrian muskets are now in use? Answer. I presume all of them, probably, except those being altered. I tried in two places, Philadelphia and Cincinnati, to get these guns rifled and

the locks altered. The Philadelphia house estimated the cost of alteration at something over five dollars, and I would have preferred their being altered as proposed by the Philadelphia house, even at the higher price; but I submitted. the question to Captain Callender, the ordnance officer having charge of the arsenal there, and his judgment was that it would make a very good gun altered as the Cincinnati house proposed to alter it, and as they proposed to do it for a lower price, I contracted to have them altered there; but I think it would have been made a much better weapon to have been altered in Philadelphia, even at the greater price.

By Mr. Gooch:

Question. I desire now to call your attention to the Hall carbines, as they are called. Some of them were purchased in New York in pursuance of your order, were they not?

Answer. All of them, I think.

Question. Will you state the particulars of that transaction?

Answer. In brief, I received a despatch from Mr. Simon Stevens offering me carbines, and I purchased them at once.

Question. Did you know the character of that weapon at the time you purchased it, or the history of it?

Answer. I supposed it to be the usual Hall carbine which I had used in a journey overland on one occasion.

Question. You were familiar with it?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. What was the price paid for them?

Answer. I think it was $22.

Question. How did the gun prove itself—to be a good arm?

Answer. It proved to be a good arm. It was proved at the arsenal, and I think they had Captain Hoskin's report in regard to it, and he said it fired with reasonable accuracy. It proved to be, I supposed, an ordinarily good weapon. Further than that I do not know, It is a weapon for cavalry, and of course for close quarters. I have here an ordnance manual in which the regulation price is stated.

Question. What is the regulation price?

Answer. It is $21, (turning to the price as fixed in the manual.)

Question. Is that the price of the weapon after it was altered, or the original price?

Answer. The original price is $21. The alteration cost something over a dollar, as I have understood; I do not know.

Question. Was the alteration an improvement?

Answer. Yes, sir. It was rifled, so far as you may consider that an improvement of a short arm; and I think there was some contrivance put on for opening it more readily; and then the chamber was enlarged.

Question. Were you in need of these arms for immediate use at the time they were purchased?

Answer. Very much, indeed. I had cavalry in the field, and no arms whatever for them.

Question. Was Stevens an agent of the government at that time, or did he hold any appointment under you?

Answer. Not at that time.

Question. Not at the time of the purchase?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Was he subsequently an aide-de-camp to you?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Did he make any purchase in behalf of the government after he was appointed on your staff?