Sunday, February 23, 2014

Report of Mr. Tucker, Assistant Secretary of War, to Mr. Stanton, Secretary of War, Relative to the McClcllan Expedition

War Department,
Washington City, D. C, April 5, 1862.

SIR: I beg permission to make the following report relative to the transportation of troops, horses, wagons, batteries, and usual equipments, recently shipped at this city, Alexandria and Perryville.

I was called to Washington by telegraph on the 17th January last by Assistant Secretary of War Thomas A. Scott. I was informed that Major General McClellan wished to see me. From him I learned that he desired to know if transportation in smooth water could be obtained to move at one time, for a short distance, (from Annapolis to the mouth of the Rappahannock river,) about 50,000 troops, 10,000 horses, 1,000 wagons, 13 batteries and the usual equipment of such an army. He frankly stated to me that he had always supposed such a movement entirely feasible until two experienced quartermasters bad recently reported it impracticable in their judgment. A few days afterwards I reported to General McClellan that I was entirely confident the transports could be commanded, and stated the mode by which his object could be accomplished. A week or more afterwards I had the honor of an interview with the President and General McClellan, when the subject was further discussed, and especially as to the time required. I expressed the opinion that as the movement of the horses and wagons would have to be made chiefly by schooners and barges; that as each schooner would have to be properly fitted for the protection of the horses, furnished with a supply of water and forage, and also each transport for the troops provided with water, I did not deem it prudent to assume that such an expedition could start within thirty days from the time the order was given. The President and General McClellan both urgently stated the vast importance of an earlier movement. I replied that if favorable winds prevailed, and there was great despatch in loading, the time might be materially diminished.

On the 14th February you advertised for transports of various descriptions, inviting bids. On the 27th February I was informed that the proposed movement by water was decided upon. That evening the quartermaster general was informed of the decision. Directions were given to secure the transportation, and my assistance was tendered. He promptly detailed to this duty two most efficient assistants in his department. Colonel Rufus Ingalls was stationed at Annapolis, where it was then proposed to embark the troops, and Captain Henry C. Hodges was directed to meet me in Philadelphia, to attend to chartering the vessels. With these arrangements I left Washington on the 28th February. Aware that the movement of horses and wagons would be the chief cause of delay, I had previously corresponded with Mr. M. S. Buckley, superintendent of the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company, at Port Richmond, with whom I had been officially connected for twelve years, to ascertain how many schooners and barges could be at once commanded. I telegraphed him to meet me on my arrival. I knew that I could rely on his good judgment, energy, and strict integrity to serve the government and myself without compensation or profit, direct or indirect. He, under me, had been daily familiar with a business requiring transportation by water, which for many years had exceeded the entire foreign tonnage of the port of New York. I requested Mr. Buckley not only to give full notice to all vessels at his depot that the government required such transports, but to oblige me personally by visiting the wharves in Philadelphia generally, and especially those of the Schuylkill Navigation Company, to inform the owners and captains of schooners and barges that the government desired to charter them. After remaining two days in Philadelphia, with much satisfaction in our progress, Captain Hodges and myself went to New York. All parties who offered suitable transports in reply to your advertisement had been requested to meet me. With few exceptions, such vessels were taken, and generally at a reduction from the bids. These, however, were by no means sufficient. As much publicity as possible was given, without further resort to the newspapers, that the government was in the market to charter vessels. In fact, with your advertisement and our action, it was notorious. Every owner of a vessel had the opportunity to deal directly with the representatives of the department. It was publicly avowed that the government preferred this course. When, however, a transport was offered, I did not stop to ask the party whether he was the sole owner, part owner, or merely represented the owners. Time being such an important element, it was enough for me to know (or I thought it was) that the party had proper authority to charter, that the vessel was suitable, and offered at the fair current price. To have refused suitable vessels till I could have ascertained who were the owners, or because they preferred to send an agent or even pay a ship-broker, might have taken weeks, instead of days, to have secured the required tonnage, and also greatly increased the cost, by having a part of the fleet under charter waiting for the balance. I am induced to make these remarks in consequence of the objections which I have recently heard urged against the interference of agents or ship-brokers. It may not be fully understood that in all great maritime cities negotiations for the sale, charter, and freighting of vessels are carried on, to a considerable extent at least, through ship-brokers — a business class as firmly established as stock, land, money, or merchandise-brokers. In New York they are well known as a class comprising many men of integrity and intelligence, whose services are not ignored by ship-owners. In France, Belgium, Prussia, and many other places, the charges for their services are regulated by a legalized tariff, from which the broker is not allowed to deviate. In Great Britain and the United States he is paid a commission, which, in the absence of a special agreement with the owner for whom he is acting, is regulated by custom and sanction of local chambers of commerce, boards of trade, &c.

In the case under consideration, however, no application was made to shipbrokers, no commission tendered or asked, and no preferences shown. The wants of the government were made public. Every party interested had the opportunity of direct negotiation. The business was conducted with entire fairness to the owners of vessels, and with fidelity to the government. I beg to hand herewith a statement, prepared by Captain Hodges, of the vessels chartered, which exhibits the prices paid and the parties with whom the contracts were made. From this it is shown there were engaged:

113 steamers, at an average price per day of $218.10
188 schooners, at an average price per day of $24.45
88 barges, at an average price per day of $14.27

In thirty-seven days from the time I received the order in Washington (and most of it was accomplished within thirty days) these vessels were laden at Penyville, Alexandria, and Washington, (the place of embarking the troops having been changed after all the transports had sailed, which caused confusion and delay,) with 121,500 men, 14,592 animals, 1,150 wagons, 44 batteries, besides pontoon bridges, ambulances, telegraph materials, and the immense quantity of equipage, &c, required for an army of such magnitude. The only loss of which I have heard (and I am confident there is no other) is eight mules and nine barges, which latter went ashore in a gale within a few miles of Fort Monroe, the cargoes being saved. With this trifling exception, not the slightest accident has occurred, to my knowledge.

I respectfully but confidently submit that, for economy and celerity of movement, this expedition is without parallel.

I remain, sir, very respectfully, your most obedient servant,

JOHN TUCKER, Assistant Secretary of War.

Hon. EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War.

SOURCE: Reports of the Committees of the Senate of the United States for the Third Session of the Thirty Seventh Congress, p. 328-9

No comments: