Ir. BATES, from the Committee on Military Pensions, made the following

REPORT:

The Committee on Military Pensions, to whom was referred the case of Elisha James, report:

That he has been adjudged non compos mentis, and is under the protecon of his guardian: that it is satisfactorily proved by said guardian, and ieutenant Benjamin Troy, that the said Elisha enlisted in a company of rtificers, in Colonel Baldwin's regiment, in the continental establishment, lassachusetts line, in the year 1777; served one year, and was honorably ischarged. It is also in evidence, in due form, that the whole amount of is property in possession, in value, is $137; and that no person holds in ust any property for his benefit: that he is eighty-two years old, not able > put on his own clothes, and that his family consists of a helpless wife, venty-two years old. Under those circumstances, all of which fully appear, he committee consider him entitled to a pension, and report a bill, at the ate of eight dollars per month.

1st Session.

W. C. DANIELL, vs. BARGY, NORTON, AND WOLVERTON.

MAY 26, 1830.

Referred to the Committee of the Whole House to which is committed the bill (H. R. No. 307) for the relief of Peter Burgy, Jr. Stephen Norton, and Hiram Wolverton.

SAVANNAH, May 14th, 1830.

MY DEAR SIR: On the 8th instant I received from you a printed copy of the petition of Peter Bargy, Jr. praying to be reimbursed for losses sustained in two attempts to build a dam between Fig and Hutchinson islands, for the purpose of closing a channel of the Savannah river, under a contract with me as the agent of the United States' Government, together with the documents annexed thereto. On the following day I received a copy of the report of the Committee of Claims on the application of Bargy. In this I am charged with having practised fraud on Mr. Bargy. These papers contain the first intimation to me, that my conduct as the agent of the Government has been the subject of legislative scrutiny. To complain, now, of the injustice with which I have been treated, can avail me nothing; and it is too late to ask for a hearing, before I am condemned: for the Committee have passed sentence upon me, and their report has already been placed in the hands of my fellow-citizens here. I must, nevertheless, beg leave, through you, to submit to the House of Representatives my reply to the allegations of Bargy, sustained by such testimony as the very limited time allowed has permitted me to obtain, with the urgent request, that they will be received and examined in a spirit of fairness, before a final vote is passed upon my character, which it has been the first feeling of my life to sustain unsullied. In the first place, I will remark, that Peter Bargy, Jr. is not, now, nor has he ever been, a citizen of Chatham county, or of the State of Georgia. His former, and I presume his present residence is Herkimer county, New York. I do not believe he has been in Georgia since the Spring of 1828.

It was one of the conditions upon which his proposals for building the dam between Fig and Hutchinson islands were accepted, that he should give bond and security for the faithful execution of the contract by a stipulated time.

In his letter, dated 26th July, 1827, he promised to give such bond. He afterwards refused, which was reported by me to the Government.

Although, by the contract, (which I could not get executed until some progress had been made in the work) Bargy was required to build the dam at such place as I should designate, the selection was left to himself—I reserving to myself the privilege of approving. I made no objections to the places which he made choice of. I do not believe that better could have been selected. Before Bargy entered upon the work, I informed him that every latitude would be allowed him, consistent with the object of the contract. I did not feel myself authorized to interfere further than to have the dam executed in the spirit of the contract; because, as I informed him, the

risk of failure was his. The manner of sinking the cribs was left to himself. When he informed me of his intention to build the dam by running one entire crib across the channel, I informed him of Martineau's plan, and urged, what appeared to me to be valid objections to the course he contemplated These, I said, were for his consideration; that I did not feel authorized to go further: for, that all I could require, was, that the dam should be built according to contract; whether it should be done by one or more cribs, was exclusively for his consideration; because the failure (I added) would be his loss, and he was entitled to his own plan. It is impossible that Mr. Bargy should not have fully understood me. But two or three days before the first dam gave way, I informed him, as I had repeatedly done before, that the pilings which held it in its place were loose, and that they ought at once to be driven to the depth required by the contract. It was not done, his determination being, as he said, to drive them the required depth after sink. ing the dam.

The plan which Bargy adopted in his second attempt to build a dam, certainly received my full approbation; and was in accordance with the expressed opinion of Martineau. But I cautioned Bargy not to sink a second crib until the first was filled up and secured by sheet piling, according to contract; and that the second should, in like manner, be finished before he began the third, and so on of the others. So far from following these suggestions, he sunk four cribs in quick succession during the neap tides. Whilst he was thus engaged, I informed him, that, although he had put enough weight in the cribs to sink them, yet, when the Spring tides came, the water would rise some two feet higher at high water, and that I did not think the weight would then be sufficient to keep them down; and I begged him to employ additional laborers to fill up the cribs as soon as possible, for I feared they would be thrown up by the flood tides. Mr. Bargy pursued his own plan, and in a very few days my anticipations were realized. The truth is, that Bargy had formed an erroneous estimate of the force of the tides. The pier which he had been engaged in building, or had seen, in the Hudson river, at or near Albany, was his measure and guide here. I attempted to impress upon him the fact, that a tide of seven feet fall differed in its force and power, essentially, from one of but two or three feet-but without success.

Another great error committed by Bargy was in the employment of too small a force of laborers; of this too I attempted to persuade him, but with

out success.

It is true that I notified Bargy that I would not receive the dam if a certain defective piece of timber was not removed and another supplied. I had found Bargy and his men taking every advantage to slight their work. I had remonstrated with him from time to time, but to little effect. At length I notified him, that the next time that I found him slighting his work, it should be done over, or I would not receive the dam. On the following day I found the timber so often referred to by his witnesses, but I think of smaller dimensions than they have stated, and I had it taken up. This occurred in the first attempt to build a dam. When that work gave way, I found many instances of bad work which had escaped me at the time. It is equally true that I had the pilings measured and marked; in no other way could I have ascertained that they had been driven the proper depth. This course was suggested to me by detecting Bargy in misrepresenting to me the length of the pilings driven in the commencement of the work. I most solemnly declare, that, although Bargy and his men gave me constant anxiety about

their work, throughout I acted with every iberality to him; I overlooked many slight (perhaps some considerable) imperfections in their work; and I should be pleased to see some recompense allowed to him for the losses he has sustained, provided that it be not done at the sacrifice of my character.

Nine of the persons who testify in favor of Bargy have an aggregate interest in the success of his application of more than four thousand dollars. After the failure of the enterprise, Bargy stated to me, as to others, that his ability to meet his engagements contracted on account of the dam, depended upon his obtaining funds from Government.

Bargy's workmen could not have learned from me what they have stated, even were what they have set forth correct, because my conversations were with Bargy, and not in their presence, Bargy having usually been ashore, and the immediate superintendence of the work on the river left to Norton and Wolverton. As the contract was between Bargy and myself, I felt bound to communicate to him chiefly, which I did; and when I communicated objections that arose to the work to his partners, which I sometimes did, I also made them to Bargy.

It is not true, as stated by Bargy's workmen and others, that there is quick sand in any part of the river in which any of the dams were placed; nor have I ever seen any in that vicinity.

I request that Mr. Martineau's certificate, attached to Bargy's petition, be compared with his report to the Commissioners, dated 14th February, 1827. In the latter he says, "the most favorable places examined gave an average depth of five feet ten inches at low water, to which six inches should be added for the length of the lead used. The bottom was to be very uniform on the surface, a large portion of which is firm sand, and the balance soft mud, into which any heavy structure must necessarily settle indefinitely. Taking it altogether, the foundation is decidedly favorable to build a dam upon, leaving an assurance that, if properly constructed, it will sustain all the vicissitudes to which it will ever be exposed, and answer (as far as any thing of the kind can do) the intended purpose." All the dams have been attempted upon the ground upon which Mr. Martineau expressed the above opinion. It is not true that he ever gave me the cautions to which he alludes in his certificate attached to Bargy's petition. The eagerness with which he sought the contracts proves his full confidence in the enterprise. It will be perceived that he preferred a claim for five hundred dollars for his services and the contingency alone upon which he asked it; namely, if he did not get the contracts. I paid him but two hundred dollars, at which he was much dissatisfied.

Wiltberger and Brown are the only citizens of this State who have testified to the good character and conduct of Bargy for it will be seen by his statements that Mr. Reynolds (the other signer) was deceived as to the character of the certificate presented to him for his signature. Wiltberger and Brown are two of the largest creditors of Bargy & Co. Various other applications were unsuccessfully made for additional testimonials in favor of Bargy.

In the accounts attached to the petition of Bargy, and which it is prayed that Government will pay, at least two items are twice charged: first, at page 12 in Bargy & Co's account, there are entries of two bills of timber by A. A. Smets, $126 06 and $177 16: and again, at page 14, Wiltberger and Green charge for acceptance of drafts in favor of Smets for $177 16 and $126 06. I herewith send Mr. Smet's certificate.