THE COAST SURVEY.
RE E  PLY
TO
THE OFFICIAL DEFENCE
OF
ITS COST, ABUSES AND POWER.








THE COAST SURVEY.
-  E P l Y
TO
THE OFFICIAL DEFENCE
OF
ITS COST, ABUSES AND POWER.








To the Editor of the A/. Y. Times:
Whenever a defence of the present arrangement of the
COAST SuRVEY appears, which is made up of nauseating
commendation of the head of that establishment, and indist
criminate abuse of all who believe that his peer may be
found among living men, and especially among the officers
of our army and navy; in which feigned issues are met and
real ones avoided, and the whole resting upon no foundation but studied and extended falsification and forgery of
an antagonist's statements; dullness itself will not be at
fault in determining its authorship. The official reply to
the observations of " B. B13,," signed " Public Documents."
and printed in your issue of 10th ult., so far transcends, in
such particulars, all former efforts from that quarter to mystify and pervert the truth, that one might well claim to be
excused from answering it at all. Still, in view of its " by
authority"? character, and because the document tampered
with, happens to be not of the sort which will subject the
falsifier of it to indictment by a grand jury, the point of
exemption will not be pressed. It seems proper to use this
occasion, for the further purpose of apprising the Treasury
Department, that this vile imposture is circulated under the
frank of the Coast Survey, and, in one instance at least,
bearing this endorsement: "With the compliments of the




4
Assistants of the Coast Survey." It may not be amiss for
the Department to ascertain at the same time, whether it
has not been printed at the same cost which circulates it.
It is very evident, that it is thought necessary at head
quarters, to multiply parties to the defence on this occasion,
by fiaudulently inducing a belief, that the Coast Survey is
only one of many defendants. Hence, pains are taken to
prejudice the public mind and arouse its fears, by bearing
false witness against, not only the sentiment, but even the
text of the letters of " B. B."  No man can read this official
falsification of them, and regard them  as anything less
than " letters of marque and reprisal," against nearly every
respectable man and every respectable thing in the country;
and, naturally, it is expected to happen as was intended,
that every prominent man and every institution in the land
will make common cause against what would seem to be a
common enemy. There is nothing in the letters of "B.
B." to warrant such a representation of their character or
design —it is one of the frauds upon public credulity, which
have long served and saved the establishment, and it is
expected to do good service again. The candid reader is
desired.to do, precisely what " Pub. Doc." hopes will not
be thought worth while in view of his high position and
intense respectability, viz: to try the truth of these conflicting statements by reference to the letters themselves,
even at the hazard of a mortifying discovery. In the mean
time, the same sort of reader is requested to contemplate
without partiality or prejudice, some illustrations of the
practices to which the lust of money and of power is able
to drive the conventionally eminent and honest, when
threatened with the loss of either; which are added, not
more to elucidate the matter in question, than to remind
such as have hitherto preserved innocence in high places,
that even a heathen taught: " Facilis descensus.Jverni."
The truth is, the Coast Survey is not attacked at all by
f" B. B.," nor, to his knowledge, by any body else. In the




very letters thus misrepresented by " Pub. Doc." (on page
4 of the pamphlet copy to which he refers), are these words:
" The object contemplated by Congress and by the people,
understood to be the aim of the Coast Survey, is laudable
enough; " and had the danger of misrepresentation been
thought of, the work would have been pronounced indispensable. But, whatever may be conceded as to the nrecessity of a survey of the coast, nothing of the kind was
intended in favor of the great Civil Department which has
been engrafted upon it, at an enormous annual cost to the
people, " when there are more idle officers upon the pay roll
than could be employed upon it."  Neither abridgment nor
discontinuance of the work is even hinted at by "B13. B."
Upon this point, the letters can scarcely be charged with
ambiguity. The object of " Pub. Doec." will be attained, if
he shall be able to delude the public into the belief, that a
proposition to cut off the fungi, which sap the vitality and
deform the symmetry of the Coast Survey, is one calculated
to destroy the Survey itself. The work would be injured
by it, much in the way a ship might be by having the barnacles removed from her bottom.
" Pub. Doec." begs sympathy, because " the writer sneers
at Prof. Bache, for not hazarding the success of this great
national work, by mingling with party politics." The diligent are desired to seek in the letters anything to justify
the statement; for, the writer having no such belief,
can scarcely have had such an intent. A more cunning
attempt to excite partisan prejudice against an important
question in political economy, than is made by " Pub. Doec."
himself, in this very case, is seldom witnessed in real life.
" The mode in which it is prosecuted," would become the
veriest political rogue that ever appeared upon the boards
at Washington; and it is not a little odd, that a political
innocent, uses without hesitation, an "artful dodge," from
which an ordinary political trickster would recoil. " My
lord, this is a poor, mad soul, and she says up and down the




6
town, that her eldest son is like you," was the "mode" in
which one " now in Arthur's bosom, if ever a man went to
Arthur's bosom," sought to prejudice the Chief Justice
against an honest claim; and, if " the present honored executive " as much resembles that shrewd functionary, as his
informant does Falstaff, he will be likely to reply in the
words of the Chief Justice: "I am well acquainted with
your manner of wrenching the true cause the wrong way.
It is not a confident brow nor the throng of words that
come with such more than impudent sauciness from you,
can thrust me from a level consideration." Upon page 12
of the pamphlet copy of " B. B.," the President and his Cabinet may find what " Pub. Doc." read there, touching the
extent of their responsibility for the present conduct of the
Coast Survey, in the view of " B. B."  He says: "The
anomalies which make the Coast Survey odious and expensive, are not chargeable to any political party —hence, it is
not the duty of any party, but it is of all parties, to destroy
them. The present administration must sanction and continue
them before it can be fairly held responsible for them. The
approaching session of Congress will furnish an opportunity
to demonstrate its sentiment in regard to a reform of the
abuses of an establishment, which has contributed largely
to increase its pecuniary embarrassments. The occasion
will be a fit one for the Secretary of the Treasury to express
the views of the administration upon the whole subject, in
his Annual Report." In the face of so particular a statement by "B. B.," upon this particular point, this eschewer
of political aid and comfort assures "the present honored
Executive, his eminent Cabinet " and Congress, that they
are denounced by " B. B.," as " accomplices " in whatever
swindling there may be carried on under the name and in
the livery of the Coast Survey. Some general remarks by
" B. B.," upon governmental extravagance, are relied upon
by "Pub. Doc.," to sustain his misstatement; but the Chaplain to Congress, who shall preach a sermon upon intem



7
perance, may as fairly be charged with affirming the individual drunkenness of each member of that body.
The Secretary of the Treasury is regarded with peculiar
dread by " Pub. Doc." His position, as well as his integrity, accounts for this. No other member of the Cabinet has
relations or duties towards the Coast Survey so intimatethere is more to be feared from his department than from
any other. Hence, it was thought expedient to add a count
to the supposititious indictment of "the present honored
Executive, and his eminent Cabinet," designed specially to
wound the self-respect of the dreaded Secretary. " In what
complimentary terms," exclaims "Pub. Doc." he alludes
to the Secretary of the Treasury, who is " not the equal of
one of his subordinates! " The thought is worthy of the
Vicar of Bray himself; but there is a great miscalculation as
to the personal qualities of the man designed to be imposed
upon. The Secretary will but despise this deceiver, when
he discovers, wrested from the context and garbled at that,
a remark which ordinary intelligence could not misunderstand. If it had been vague, what is to be thought of one,
who, for the words, " The very Secretary, whose subordinate he is in law, is by no means his equal in power and
influence," substitutes as quoted, " not the equal of one of
his subordinates! " But the sentence is not vague standing
alone, and is immediately followed by an illustration of its
truthfulness, inl these words: " Congress may fail the Secretary-it never does his subordinate."  A fact undenied,
because undeniable; as fit to be pondered by " the present
honored Executive," his Cabinet, Congress, and all to whom
these presents may come, as by the Secretary alleged to be
overshadowed. When officers, created by the Constitution,
are notoriously surpassed in power and influence by their
own appointee, it can not be but wise and timely for them
to enquire, "Upon what meat doth this our Caesar feed, that
he is grown so great?"
Seeing the main object of " B. B." was to maintain the fit



8
ness of the officers of the Army and Navy to execute the
work of the Coast Survey, and the expediency of committing
it to their charge, under the general supervision of the Secretary of the Navy, there is more than ordinary baseness in
this official attempt to deceive those very officers and the
public into a belief, that " B. B." sympathizes in the notion
and endorses the stale calumny of the civilians of the Coast
Survey, that those officers are not equal to that duty. Attempts to overawe by a parade of power, to cajole by flattery and to mislead by calumny the agencies by which alone
the hand of reform can be applied to the Coast Survey, are
discreditable enough, and the motive is obvious as the
means are scandalous; but essays to array against a measure the identical parties whose credit and advantage are
the main designs of it, by rank falsehood sustained by fabricated testimony, altogether surpass them in boldness and
perhaps in wickedness.
"Pub. Doc." charges against " B. B." that "He finally resolves upon one more effort, and aims a shot at the army;
because, probably, Professor Bache is a graduate of West
Point."  The word " finally" shows that "Pub. Doc." was
aware of the locality, and the allusion to the "gradhate of
West Point" that he had read the remarks of "B. B." in
this behalf; and the reader is requested to refer to page 13
of the pamphlet copy and see upon what foundation the
charge rests. It will be found as follows:
" The Superintendent himself was a standing refutation
of the preposterous assumption, that recourse to civilians
was indispensable to the work; yet, in the face of it, the
pretence was made available. Much of the work was then
and had been performed by officers furnished by the army
and navy, and so their capabilities stood vindicated. The
very education, the results of which the Superintendent was
selling to the government at six thousand per annum as a
civilian, he had acquired as a Cadet, at the cost of that very
government. Himself a graduate of West Point, the fitness




9
of other graduates to do what he professed to do was denied; as if the capacity of such as continued in the service
of the government which educated them, was, by their honorable fidelity made less, but might be enlarged by entering
the same service in a civil capacity at a high salary! The
absurdity of this pretence is glaring enough to make it impotent against common sense, but the affectation of belief in
it may give baneful potency to the evil practice upon which
the fallacy is founded. The practice deserves anything but
encouragement at the hands of Congress."'
What must be the moral constitution of one capable of
assuming such a fact from such statements, or the intellectual which can extract such an inference from such premises?
It being the custom of the service to require specifications of charges, "'i Pub. IDoc." conforms to the military
pattern, and makes specifications of his charge against
"' B. B."  The " shot" itself is quoted, and with apparent
fairness " B. B." is condemned " out of his own mouth."
It runs thus:
" Our noble spirited volunteers should not again be sent
into the field under the command of officers who dig ditches
on the wrong side of embankments, and the Mexican war as
well as the recent embroilment with Utah demonstrates
that we need no standing army." Upon which alleged
statements of " B. B." the figure head of the Coast Survey
makes this luminous commentary: "What this idea has to
do with the mode of prosecution of the Coast Survey, which
the writer set out to discuss, is not exactly understood."
" B. B." shares the disability of" Pub. Doc.," and can see
no possible good to come to the Coast Survey from a " shot"
aimed at the army, and never having seen otherwise denies
that he has fired even a blank cartridge in that direction.
There is just enough of what " B. B." did say in the travesty of it given by " Pub. Doc.," to show that he was entirely
familiar with what " B. B." really said, and just enough to
2




10
obscure or utterly pervert what " B. B." did say. Now contrast the counterfeit by "Pub. Doc." with the genuine by
" B. B.," from the final page of the pamphlet copy. It says:
"'The Mexican war, as well as the recent embroilment
with Utah, demonstrates that the familiarity of our people
with the use of firearms insures us at all times the possession of material for an army, while their spirit and patriotism makes it certain that we need no standing army; the
supply of volunteers has always been more than equal to
the occasion. The same experience which proves no lack
of troops, does, however, betray a want of properly educated officers. Our noble spirited volunteers should not again
be sent into the field under command which digs ditches on
the wrong side of the embankments. The true policy is to
keep our military and naval schools in the highest state of
efficiency, and so secure at all times an educated staff for
our army and navy. The country will be compensated for
the entire cost in the first campaign of the next war, and a
more valuable compensation still will accrue to it in times
of peace, if it shall commit the Survey of the Coast and kindred enterprises, to the accomplished men who annually
graduate in its own academies."
There are few schoolboys among us who are not quite informed, that the remarkable inversion of military art, referred to by " B. B.," is the feat of an officer taken from
civil life-there are none who could read it in the connection
in which it stands and mistake the object for which it is
stated. That "Pub. Doc." was either ignorant of the fact,
or mistaken as to the purpose for which it was referred to,
is not to be presumed in the face of so many evidences of
intelligence as his reply discloses; but that same reply furnishes such proof of his utter destitution of moral honesty,
as to leave no room to doubt, that both the falsehood and
the false quotation are the work of uncommonly intelligent
depravity. A bolder or meaner attempt to libel an oppo



nent and to take judgment by fraud, it is believed, can not
be found in the annals of controversy.
It is paralleled, however, by another essay of the same
sort, upon the men of science, who "mainly" compose the
"National Association for the Advancement of Science."
In this case "the Zouaves of the Coast Survey" in the
association are made to stand for the association itself; and
some descriptive remarks, applicable to but one and that
the least respectable society upon the earth, are, deliberately and falsely, applied to the National Association for the
Advancement of Science. The audacity of this attempt
will be appreciated, if the reader will compare the passages written by " B. B." with those quoted falsely by " Pub.
Doc."
" B. B." wrote (see page 11 of the pamphlet copy):
"It is not surprising that an organization which has
shown itself able to subdue to its purposes administrations
and statesmen of all political parties, and the Congress of
the United States, however constituted politically, has found
it easy to rule with a rod of iron, an association mainly
composed of simple minded men of science, with no aspirations but such as become scholars, and as free from all design to deplete the treasury of the United States as they are
full of zeal to replenish the treasury of knowledge. The
Zouaves of the CoIst Survey in the National Association,
united by the " cohesive power of public plunder," have become the scourge of the men of science in this country, and
the scorn of the same class everywhere else. Tyrannical,
contemptuous and unjust at home, they are insolent and supercilious to the brotherhood of science abroad; the courtesies of the country are declined and its territory is avoided by the most distinguished astronomers of the old world,
because their science has such representatives here. Known
and derided, under the apposite name of the Mutual Admiration Society, by men of sense throughout the length and
breadth of the land, such is the power of the Coast Survey,




12
that the capabilities for mischief of so mean a society are
kept by it unimpaired and unabridged, under universal contempt and disgust. It is intolerable that the church, the
state, the army, the navy, art, literature and science, the
commerce, the mines, the fisheries, the ship yards and the
work shops of the country shall be longer subsidized, at the
public cost, to the support of a clique insignificant in number and contemptible in character. If the scientific status of
that society requires the aids now used, Congress will find it
less burdensome to the treasury and more just to the people, to declare, by joint resolution, that it is what its parasites affirm it to be-the depository of what science there
may be on this side of the Atlantic, and that no extent of
acquirement or of achievement shall establish a reputation
for any man, unless he holds its dispensation to that effect.
At all events, the power to punish insubordination, as all independent opinion is called, without the formality of even
a drum head court martial, should no longer be maintained
at the public expense, in the hands of one who has had certain notions of loyalty, as base and unmanly submission is
called, "ground into him  by a West Point mill stone."
Something is due to the infirmity of human judgment; and
the obtuseness which fails to apprehend in an inflated professor, who has discovered nothing, the superior of a
modest one who has discovered ten asteroids, or to discern
Bessell redivivus in an American counterfeit, may deserve
pity, but should be spared punishment."
It is submitted that without being elegant, the language
of the paragraph is plain, yet this contemner of a "low mode
of warfare," renders nonsense for its plainness and false
statements for its facts. As before, there are phrases and
denominations retained in the forgery, which conclusively
prove that "Pub. Doc." had read for himself what "B. B."
had written of the subject matter, and there are phrases
and denominations discarded from it, which prove as conclusively that-" Pub. Doc.," at all events, did understand what




13
was written. With the air and directness of an honest man,
he testifies that "B. B." said:
1"The assistants of the Coast Survey have become the
scourge of men of science in this country, and the scorn of
the same class everywhere. Tyrannical, contemptuous and
unjust at home, they are insolent and supercilious to
the brotherhood of science abroad. The courtesies of the
country are declined and its territory avoided by the most
distinguished astronomers of the Old World, because their
science has such representatives here. Known and divided
under the apposite name of the mutual admiration society.
Such is the power of the Coast Survey, that the capabilities
of mischief of so mean a society as the American Association for the Advancement of Science are kept unimpaired
and under universal contempt and disgust."
It may be, that some compositor or proof reader, will be
charged with having yielded to an instinct of propriety, by
denying the use of capital letters to " the mutual admiration
society," and that " divided " was printed for " derided;"
but not by corrections of that sort, will the counterfeit be
brought to even a remote resemblance to the genuine paragraph. The circumstance that they are typographically
alike, in the article in the Times and in the government
copy, makes it more likely that it was written as printed;
that the " society" might elude notice, and its character
escape contempt. Time, and perhaps the TIMEs will show,
whether "the mutual admiration society" is commended
to public favor, by this revelation of the tactics which sustain it, or whether it has not hastened the hour, already too
long delayed. Power, ill-gotten and worse used, commonly
ends its career suddenly and ignominiously; and if this
" society" survives this demonstration of its eminent head,
there will be ground for the belief, that like the Wandering
Jew, its infamy is to be denied the refuge of dissolution.
An exceeding blessing vouchsafed to the state of Florida,
is made to yield benefactions and benedictions by the




14
shower upon the Coast Survey. The state itself is largely
amphibious, and seems to have been created physically in
the interest of that establishment, being made up of little
else than coast, and that fit for nothing so much as to be
surveyed. It bristles with keys, exactly fitting the locks of
the public treasury; which keys are at present kept by the
Coast Survey. Never having been in hands better for the
interests of the state, it is quite natural that Florida should
seek to keep them there; and discerning signs of perpetuity
in the Coast Survey, not to be found in any other institution of the government, and perhaps not in the government
itself, it is just as natural that the state should regard it as
the only organization which promises to be as enduring as
its needs.
That, the representative of a state, so regarding an establishment, should speak in its praise, and strive to make such
states as " do not feel its benefits," believe that of all they
are the most benefited, is almost a mater of course; and,
therefore, no surprise ought to be felt, that Senator Mallory
of' Florida, " during the last session of Congress —in open
session," did so natural a thing. " Pub. Doc." quotes some
of his remarks, and it is not to be denied, they do not harmonize with the representations of " B. B.," of views entertained regarding the Coast Survey, by "legislators like
Benton, Mallory and Cushing."  The incongruity is caused,
however, by nothing but a juggle of the principal Fakir of
the establishment; and the real wonder is, that Benton and
Cushing escape being paraded as eulogists of what neither
lost an opportunity to denounce, so long as he was in public life.
This unscrupulous falsifier of "B. B.," says: "Senator
Mallory is also mentioned by this writer, as an opponent of
the Coast Survey. During the last session of Congress,
that distinguished Senator, in the course of a debate on the
Coast Survey, in open session, made the following remarks,"
&c.  It is no disparagement to him, whatever it may be




15
to "B. B." to say, that the latter's first knowledge of
Senator Mallory came from "Pub. Doc." himself; and had
not confirmatory documents been " available," at this hour
"B. B." would be incredulous as to the existence of that
Senator. Not a man in the nation knew better than " Pub.
Doc.," that Francis Mallory of Virginia, the colleague of
Cushing in the Committee on the Coast Survey, in 1842,
was the " legislator " of that name referred to by " B. B.;"
nor will a man in the nation doubt it, after reading the letters of " B. B.," and these illustrations of the utter want of
truth and honor in him who has falsified them. Not content with the use of this basest of all forms of falsehood,
to convict his adversary of a misstatement of fact, " Pub.
Doc." improves upon the circumstance in this wise: " His
egregious blunder, in referring to the Senator from Florida,
betrays his ignorance of the subjects he attempts to discuss" —the logic of which proposition is about equal to the
honesty which suggested it; and exchibits "Pub. Dec."
quite as ready to play fool as rogue to maintain the Coast
Survey, its cost, abuses and power, unimpaired and unabridged.
The consciousness of power " to wrench the true cause
the wrong way," felt by the Coast Survey, may be measured
by the indifference to the commonest requirements of fairness displayed by " Pub. Doc.," and by the manifest contempt
he has for any consequences to come from detection and
exposure. In the evident belief, that " the image and
superscription " of the Coast Survey will cause to pass current, against the letters themselves, his elaborate perversion and falsification of them, he hesitates not to misrepresent the general tenor of the letters of " B. B.," as well as
their particular statements. With the positiveness of one
who knew what he was talking about, this libeler attempts
to beguile his readers into the belief, that " B. B." fairly
stultifies himself thus: " The Superintendent of the Coast
Survey," says the writer, " is so highly esteemed as a scien



16
tific man, and has performed his public duties so well, that
no one will listen to my abuse of him, and defenders are
sure to rise up whenever he is attacked;" and elsewhere
"Pub. Doc.," lying to the same point, strives to represent
"B. B." as saying that the Superintendent's " highest
crime" is, "that he has accomplished his public duties to
the satisfaction of his country."  " B. B." is as innocent of
such opinions, as his letters are of statements at all calculated to sustain them. Whatever might be said upon an
issue touching the manner inl which the Superintendent has
discharged his oficial duties, no such issue was raised by
" B. B." If any functions of his are alluded to, it will be very
clearly seen they are not in the remotest degree official.
Besides, if it be in the power of " B. B." to show that the
ceaseless adulation poured upon the Superintendent is altogether undeserved, he could not be forced or coaxed into
doing so on this occasion.
If the proposition were to change the head of the
Coast Survey, such an issue would be inevitable; but such
is not the proposition, nor has such been the direction of
effort. The best of all reasons for changing the Superintendence might not be good ones for altering the Organization: while, on the other hand, reform of the establishment
would very likely provide every thing necessary to that
end —the greater would include the less. The measure of
reform proposed goes to abolish utterly the anomalous, unconstitutional, yet powerful civil department, which has
been noiselessly and insidiously engrafted upon the original
plan to survey the Coast; and to remand the entire business of the Coast Survey to officers of the army and navy,
under the general supervision of the Secretary of. the Navy.
It is a characteristic belittling and mystifying of the real
question, to treat it as one whether the present Superintendent has performed his official duties well, or ill, or at all.
If in the course of events, however, that question shall
arise, " Pub. Doc." may rest assured it will not be avoided.




17
Disingenuous always, "P ub. Doc." represents "B. B." as
"C glad to escape from a discussion of the scientific and comnercial character of the Coast Survey."  Why should
c" B. B." be " glad to escape from a discussion" of what
neither he nor anybody else controverts? " Pub. Doec."
himself is not more convinced of the propriety and utility
of a survey of the coast than is "B. B.," and if the Coast
Survey per se is attacked from any quarter, "B. B." will feel
bound to defend it by all lawful and righteous means, as
zealously as " Pub. Doc." defends the "cost, abuses and
power " of the present arrangement of it, by weapons never
found in honest hands. The necessity of a survey of the
coast is conceded on all sides. It is only the notion, that
the continuance of the work is impossible under any other
system or auspices than those which now control it, that is
scouted and derided. "Servility and'interest" have so
extensively and diligently circulated that notion that mere
iteration has warped the public judgment in regard to it;
but if the confessors outside the pale of " servility and ininterest" are asked a reason for such a belief, it will be found
to rest upon no conclusions of their own minds. The idea
is unphilosophical in theory, and untrue in point of fact.
"There are as good fish in the sea as have ever been
caught;" and the army and navy have as competent officers
remaining in the service, as have ever been taken from it by
the superior pay and emoluments of the civil service of the
government.
Perhaps it may be allowed even by the " mutual admiration society," that the present Superintendent is at least
mortal; and what does not threaten the Survey in view of
this fact? Would it be less than wise to determine by actual experiment, while the Superintendent abides in the
flesh, whether a survey of the coast without his superintendence be a practicable thing? If it should turn out that
this work and the life of this Superintendent are coterminous, he might be restored, and the whole energies of the
3




18
country concentrated in an effort to finish the work before
the light of science should be extinguished forever. It is
not pleasant to think that, by so slender a thread as a single
human life, hang so important things. Such as are hopeful
enough to expect the world to go on without the present
Superintendent-without the Smithsonian Institution-and
without the Nautical Almanac, may be properly left to the
consolations of such a belief; but humanity comes in aid
of prudence and seconds the demland, that something be
done to save from despair such as, like Fluellen, have no
hope of the world but in "Alexander the Pig."
Apochryphal as may be, "B. B.'s" gladness to escape
from such a discussion, there can be no doubt that the sorrow of "Pub. Doc." is real —that the question is not what
he falsely represents it to be. He affects to raise the question as to the"' scientific and commercial character" of the
Coast Survey himself, and by that motion reveals how it
would have been met had it been in the case. It is a fair
illustration of the ethics which govern the Coast Survey, as
well as of the tactics by which its present dominion has
been acquired, and by which it is expected to be sustained.
" Pub. Doc." says: " Mr. Hassler contended for a quarter
of a century against overwhelming difficulties, and only operated from one centre. It is not surprising that Congress
should have become anxious to advance more rapidly." In
the same connection he says: " At the time MAr. Hassler was
asked whether he could finish the coast with his small allowance of $ 100,000 in twenty years, the only charts then in
use on our coast, were those made by British vessels, and by
the enterprising firm of the Messrs. Blunt, of New York."
The object of such statements as these is very plain, nor
does the Coast Survey ever lose on opportunity to aid it by
repeating them. It is for no purpose but to disparage the
achievements of Hassler by suggesting unfair comparisons
between them and those of the present Superintendent. Hence
the sly remark, "It is not surprising that Congress should




19
have become anxious to advance more rapidly" —an anxiety
hardly attributable to anything else than that Hassler's progress had been slow. This all proceeds upon the assumption that no one will call to mind the fact, that nearly the
entire of Hassler's extensive and valuable results were accomplished in less than one half of a quarter of a century.
All the term during which the work had no existence except in acts of Congress, the years Hassler spent in Europe
to procure instruments for the work, are meanly counted
against him as years spent in the field. The entire appropriations for the first twenty-five years are but $73,900. It
was Congress that was slow —it was Hassler who was
anxious.
In 1832, Hassler was first fairly allowed to proceed, and
then upon the meagre appropriation of $20,000. It was not
until 1840 he enjoyed an annual appropriation of $100,000,
and the entire appropriations to the Coast Survey, "at
the time Mr. Hassler was asked," &c., amounted to $793,900.
The Coast Survey method of impressing the public with
the idea that Hassler's labors were nugatory, is so to state
some other fact as to make such a deduction possible. On
this occasion, it is alleged that " at the time," &c., "the
only charts then in use on our coast were those made by
British vessels, and by the enterprising firm of Messrs.
Blunt of New York." Done into Coast Survey English, all
this means that up to 1842, for then was the time when "Mr.
Hiassler was asked," &c., by Caleb Cushing —and, as HEassler died in 1843, i~ may as well be said, at the time of
his death, after laboring a quarter of a century from only
one centre, he had produced nothing. The truth, however,
is, Mr. Hassler contended with difficulties which the present
Superintendent has never encountered, and in less than
twelve years of actual labor, he accumulated a capital of results upon which the Coast Survey has traded from that day to
this. Maps made and engraved, under his superintendence,
survive him, and any of IHassler's assistants will see in the




20
tail now flaunted by the Peacock of the Coast Survey, the
feathers borrowed from Hassler.
The rise and progress of appropriations to the Coast Survey, under the requisitions by Hassler and Bache respectively, was illustrated by a detailed statement of them, which
may be found at pages 4 and 5, of the pamphlet copy of
"B. B.'s" letters. It was followed by some moral and economical reflections thereon, the object of which, it was
thought, was entirely unmistakable. Somehow, " Pub. Doc."
contrives to be regularly bothered by it. He does his best
to make the intent either false, or obscure to others as he
pretends it to be to himself, nor can it be denied that lihe
has succeeded. So much of what he says in this relation,
as can be understood at all, is false; and there is neither
sense nor meaning of any sort left in the remainder. Hear
what he says: " We have said that this writer does not
allude to the progress of the Coast Survey. He does, however, in one place present a masterly comparison of the
progress under Professor Bache during the last fourteen
years, with the work executed by the first distinguished and
honored Superintendent, Mr. Hassler. He says: "Ill 1842,
the Select Committee of Congress asked that distinguished
nan,' Do you think that under the most favorable circumstances, and with a continuance of a yearly appropriation
of $100,000, the survey of the coast can be completed in
twenty years?' He replied,'Perhaps."' The good old
man-peace to his memory-did not wish to say no; but he
expressed his doubts in the strongest language at his
command, and added, "The progress is slower at first, but
the means increase as the work proceeds."  " i ark," says
this letter writer, fourteen years afterwards, "how the theory of Hassler and the practice of the present Superintendent repel each other; as the means increase, progress is
slower, is the mode of Professor Bache." He evidently
calls attention to something following, with regard to the
progress of the survey, or its mode of prosecution, but




21
having no " documents available, suddenly leaves the subject without further comment."
Nothing can be further from the purpose of' B. B. in making
the comparative statement and the remarks thereupon, than
is the purpose imputed to him by " Pub. Doc.;" unless it be
granted, that by "the work executed by the first distinguished and honored Superintendent Mr. Hassler," and by
"the progress under Professor Bache during the last fourteen years," nothing is to be understood saving and excepting their respective levies upon the Public Treasury. If it
be the respective labors of those men in that department of
effort which is the subject of contrast, " B. B." concurs in
thejudgment of so skillful- a sapper and miner of the Treasury
as " Pub. Doec.," that it is " a masterly comparison."  How
"the work" of Hassler appears beside " the progress under
Professor Bache!"  After a connection of some sort with
the survey of thirty five years, the total of appropriations for
Hassler's " work" is $893,900; while such has been "the
progress under Prof. Bache during the last fourteen years,"
that the total appropriations for his "progress" are $4,221,110! If the comparison be "masterly," what word will
properly characterize thefeat?
The attempt to conceal the meaning of the question referred to in the quotation, and Mr. Hassler's reply to it, is
characteristic, but will not succeed. The examiner, who
put the question and heard Mr. Hassler's answer, is alive,
and no doubt, will, if requested, assure " Pub. Doec," that
both Mr. Hassler and himself were in full possession of their
senses. The fact is, and will stand forever, that nMr. Hassler
only doubted whether a survey of the then coast of the United
States could be completed in twenty years, at a total cost
of $2,000,000? A more fearless witness than Mr. Hassler
has never been under examination anywhere, and he was
just the last man then alive of whom it canll be said, he " did
not wish to say no, but he expressed his doubts in the
strongest language at his command," when his conviction




22
was that " no" was the proper answer. There can be no
doubt that Mr. Cushing's question approximated so nearly
to Mr. HIassler's own idea of the term and cost of the survey, that Mr. Hassler was not able to say positively that
twenty years and two millions of dollars were not sufficient
for the purpose. It is to be expected that some pains will
be taken to mislead the public on this point, by an establishment which has within the last two years consumed as much
of the public funds as Mr. Hassler would have needed in
twenty years to complete what even now is only begun.
It almost exceeds belief, that such a medley of words as
the quotation from "Pub. Doc.," now under examination,
could be suggested from statements, so plain as those of B.
B. upon which the paragraph is obviously founded. The
statements may be found at page 5 of the pamphlet copy of
B. B. letters, and are as follows:
" It is doubtful if our language can furnish words which
will so well describe the peculiar talent of the Superintendent, or so well illustrate his skill in applying it, as do these
figures. Means are not at hand to determine whether the
appropriation of $100,000, in 1843, was made upon his requisition or upon the estimate of his predecessor; but the
modest $80,000, of 1844, was undoubtedly of his own projection. How the appointing power must have felicitated
itself upon the acquisition of a Superintendent who seemed
to promise improvement upon the economy of Hassler! In
1842, the Select Committee of Congress asked that distinguished man, " Do you think that, under the most favorable
circumstances, and with continuance of a yearly appropriation of $100,000, the survey of the coast can be completed
in twenty years?"  He replied, "Perhaps.  The progress
is slower at first, and the means increase as the work proceeds." Mark how the theory of Hassler and the practice
of the present Superintendent repel each other; and how
the one has misused the peace, conquered by the other, for
the Coast Survey. It was at that session Hassler vindicated




23
the utility of a survey of the coast, with such power that
not even the management of the present Superintendent has
as yet neutralized it:/'
" The progress is slower at first, and the means increase
as the work proceeds," is the rule of the founder of the
work, and the ablest administrator ever connected with it.
As the work proceeds and the means increase, progress is
slower and the cost increases-is the i- ode of his successor.
The show of economy and retrenchment begun and ended
with 1844. Year by year, as he was able to entrench and
fortify his position by increase of the patronage of his own
department, and by procuring the control of the patronage
of others, the appropriations of' the Coast Survey have
grown, until, after fifteen years increase of means, the important element in Hassler's estimate, half a million no longer
serves for the expenses of a single year; and, during his
term, Congress has granted to the Coast Survey the enormous amount of four millions three hundred and twenty-one
thousand one hundred and ten dollars!"
" But since Professor Bache was placed in charge of the
work," says "Pub. Doc.," "our sea coast has been more
than doubled in extent by the admission of Texas and the
acquisition of California, and these parts of the coast now
require the heaviest expenditure. Yet, with all this accumulation of labor, what is the comparative cost? The average yearly expenditure has been, during late years, only
about $300,000, and the work is in active progress from the
eastern boundary of Maine to the northern boundary of our
Pacific possessions; and it is estimated, from the progress
of these late years, that the Atlantic and Gulf coasts will
be essentially completed in twelve years more."
It will not be easy to find later years than those which
immediately precede the present one, and the annual appropriations by Congress alone, to the Coast Survey for eight
of them, are repeated from " B. B."




24
18508.50.......... $421,000
1851.............................   310,000
1852,....................  406,110
1853,................................  386,000
1854,........................        386,000
1855,.............................  445,000
1856,..............................  500,000
1857.............................. 545,000
$3,399,110
Coast Survey arithmetic from such figures makes the average yearly expenditure, "'during late years, only about
$300,000!"  It is scarcely possible, as one reads that " it is
estimated, from the progress of these late years, that the
Atlantic and Gulf coasts will be essentially completed in
twelve years more," to repress a mental calculation, that
the Treasury will be at ease after it shall have disbursed
$3,600,000 more to the survey of those coasts!
If it had been the purpose of "Pub. Doc." to do any
thing but to befog the question of cost, and to salve it by
suggesting a hope of the beginning of an end, which no experience warrants, he would not have ignored an element of
cost which " B. B." had put forth prominently, as this; (see
page 8 of the pamphlet copy): "If the appropriations by
Congress covered the entire cost of the Coast Survey, it
would be enough to demand a review of its expenses with
a view to abridge them; and if the amazing increase of
cost in the latter years be considered, investigation would
seem indispensable. They comprise, however, only the
sums appropriated directly to the Coast Survey. Its indirect
levies upon the public property and funds are believed to be
much greater." It was quite bad enough to understate the
annial appropriations only by about $125,000 per annum;
bu"ly asnsume a correct average of them as indicating the
annual o'oN'f,ahe survey, would relieve the matter very
little in the tfeth of " B. B.'s" declaration, that its " indi



rect levies upon the public property and funds are believed
to be much greater " than the appropriations made by Congress directly for its benefit. The real cost of the work is
about the last thing the confraternity desires to see; still,
it is hoped there is spirit enough in the present Congress
to call upon the War and Navy Departments to furnish the
amount of value contributed by them, respectively, to this
work. This, added to the congressional appropriations, will
furnish a total of cost for a basis of comparison with parallel works in other countries, for which purpose only " Pub.
Doc." s:hems to think it worth while to compute the cost at
all. Whenever that shall be done, it will be found that a
million and a half per annum is more likely to be the American term in the comparison, than "only about J300,000."
If the element of cost be eliminated from the mass in
which it is now hidden, the public will be better qualified
than now, to decide how much truth there may be in the
allegation of; Pub. Dec.," concerning the figures of cost,
that, ". when compared with the work accomplished, they
show the most remarkable economy ever attained in a
national undertaking of this character, as a comparison
with foreign surveys will show." Then too, if a comparison
of the kind in question be entered upon, it will be only fair
to see that it is between works, in some respects analogous.
Contrasts of cost between a survey of the coast of the
United States, and a trigonometrical survey of the Empire
of Austria prove nothing in regard to the economy of
either.
The object of" Pub. Dc." in suggesting and making " a
comparison with foreign surveys," is plain enough, but the
way in which he contrives not to do what he seems to do,
is rather amusing. A comparison of the cost of our coast
survey with the hydrographic expenditures of foreign countries, would have disgraced him, although the cost of the
American had been lied down to only about 8300,000 per
annum. The kernel of hydrographic cost must be present,
4




26
but there was a chance to obscure it by chaff from trigonometrical surveys of foreign territory, which did not touch
the sea.
" Pub. Deoc." who uses ink with the alacrity and purpose
of the cuttle fish, gravely says  " The trigonornetrical
survey of the British Islands was commenced in 1791, and
had cost up to 1856, $12,000,000, and it is estimated, that
$8,000,000 more will be required for its completion. This
expenditure is exclusive of $17,000,000, commencing in
1837, for parish maps. The whole number of persons employed in the trigonometrical survey in 1840, was three
thousand five hundred."
" The surveys of France have been in progress nearly
one hundred years. The new map was commenced in 1818iS
and is now only two thirds finished."
" The cost of both the French and English land work, is
about five times the cost of ours; and there have been employed on the new map of France, since its commencement,
twenty-five hundred persons, men of education, besides the
laborers. Austria has expended $500,000 annually, for the
last seventeen years in her trigonometrical survey, and
contemplates an increase of yearly expenditure."
All this may possibly be true; but true or not, what has
it to do with the matter in hand? There is no denying that
the Coast Survey is innocent of some large expenditures,
of which " the trigonometrical survey of the British Islands "
appears to be guilty. The Coast Survey has not expended
" $17,000,000, commencing in 1837, for parish maps," and
in that respect is so much cheaper; yet there seems no especial merit in this, seeing "the trigonometrical survey of
the British Islands " was nothing but a survey of parishes,
and it might well make maps of its own surveys. The Coast
Survey might as well build parish churches as make " parish
maps." The matter of the map of France, and the survey
of the Austrian Empire are as much in point as the parish
maps-neither the one nor the other, having any connec



27
tion whatever with the matter pretended to be under comparison. If the cost of a riparian survey of James River,
be contrasted with the cost of a'trigonometrical survey of
the territorial area of Virginia, a parallel process to settle a
question of comparative economy will be performed.
Under this mass of irrelevant non-parallelisms, some scanty
allusions to hydrographic surveys appear, which like the
water sometimes discerned under superincumbent floodwood,
seem clear enough until disturbed. It is obvious they are
put there unwillingly.  "The hydrographic surveys of
England " says "Pub. Doc." have cost in the last twenty
years $ 10,000,000, the average number of persons employed
yearly in these surveys, being fifteen hundred. This is exclusive of the English Arctic and Antarctic expeditions. The
hydrographic survey of the British Islands is still incomplete, on account of a want of cooperation with the land
work."  " The first sounding lead was thrown in St. George's
Bay, in 1836. * * The length of the coast of France is about
600 miles only, and its survey required twenty-eight years
for its completion. The cost of the hydrography of France,
alone, since 1834, has been $4,300,000." * * "All the governments of Europe possessing sea coasts, have either finished
or are now making complete surveys of their coasts, besides
trigonometrical surveys of their whole territories."
The information contained in the preceding sentence is
grateful to all, and honorable to the governments mentioned,
and can scarcely fail to encourage men everywhere to continue surveys already begun and to inaugurate new ones.
There is nothing like surveying!
The most remarkable feature of the Coast Survey of
France is, that it is finished.  Twenty-eight years and
$4,300,000, it is said, were expended upon hydrography.
The art of government, in that country, is said to consist
in extracting money enough from the whole people to buy,
under the form of employment by the government, a sufficient number of them to overawe the rest. Now, for such




28
a system, the support of hydrographic surveys for twentyeight years, at a cost of $4,300,000, is moderate indeed.
Our own Coast Survey has had an equal amount from Congress alone, in just half as many years, and that is but part
of its cost. France is more likely to be envied than imitated,
on this side the water.
"The hydrographic surveys of England," "Pub. Doc."
says, "have cost in the last twenty years $10,000,000, the
average number of persons employed, yearly, in these surveys, being fifteen hundred.  This is exclusive of the
English Arctic and Antarctic expeditions."  The annual
expenditure of Great Britain for this purpose is half a million of dollars, and therefore the whole cost of it, annually,
is about equal to the extra-departmental cost of the U. S.
Coast Survey —in other words, probably less than half the
cost of our own survey. Perhaps the Coast Survey is entitled to tile benefit of a set-off to the " English Arctic and
Antarctic expeditions;" admitting which, it may be stated,
that the Coast Survey of these states costs twice as much,
annually, as " the hydrographic surveys of England," and
that this is exclusive of' the South Sea and Japan expeditions.
"Pub. Doc." takes it upon his honor to state, that " the
English employ constantly between two and three thousand
persons on their land work alone, while on the United
States Coast Survey, in both the land work and hydrography,
taking the officers of the army and navy and seamen of the
navy all into account, the number will not reach one-third of
the force employed on the English land work." rThe material fact affirmed by this statement, is, that the number of
persons, of all grades, employed upon the U. S. Coast Survey, " will not reach one-third " of " between two and three
thousand  persons."  The circumstance that the latter
are employed on " land work " is of' no consequence whatever. They might as well be engaged in the collieries of
Wales, and they would come quite as near harmonizing in




29
occupation, with the employees of the Coast Survey. A
careless reader is expected to be entrapped into the notion,
that the " two or three thousand persons employed on the
English land work" are busy surveying coasts, which is
false; and that the U. S. Coast Survey is prosecuted with
less than " one-third" of that number of persons, which is
also false. There is an analogy between " the hydrographic
surveys of England," and our Coast Survey, and "Pub.
IDoc." illustrates his lack of the sort of memory needed but
not always possessed by his class, by forgetting that, in
another connection, he had revealed his knowledge of the
number actually employed upon those surveys, and that he
of all men had least occasion to impress into his service
"the force employed on the English land work."  The
words of " Pub. Dec.," in relation to this point, are: " the
average number of persons employed, yearly, in these surveys, being fifteen hundred."  The true state of the case,
then, is, that the " hydrographic surveys of England " are
performed by fifteen hundred persons, at an annual cost of
five hundred thousand dollars.
To make foundation for a reproach to B. B., "Pub. Doc."
contributes an item of information thus: "We will add,
for the information of those who may chance to read these
papers, that the writer omitted, probably through ignorance,
to add -to the thirty-seven officers enumerated, two hundred
laborers who are usually employed with the field parties."
The ignorance is confessed —" lucus a non lucendo" is a compensation not always achieved by it. Besides, since the
commencement of this controversy, the Coast Survey has
thrown its annual "tub to the whale."  It may be found in
your paper of Nov. 25, 1858, under the head of "Naval
Intelligence,'  and is entitled "Operations of the Coast
Survey."  Among other interesting matters a humorous but
graphic account of a division of its fleet is given in these
words: "In the work of triangulation and topography of
the coast of the United States there are somie twenty schoon



30
ers employed under the supervision of Prof. A. D. Bache.
These vessels vary in size firom twenty to one hundred and
fifty tons, and are generally of light draft to admit of their
operating in shoal waters. They each carry, besides an
effective crew, a complete surveying party, making from
thirty to forty men each. The presence of these "long,
low, black schooners" off the headlands and harbor entrances of the coast sometimes give rise to suspicions that
there are slavers about." Not less then than 800 persons
are sometimes suspected of being what they are not, because
they are on board these vessels.
By the same bulletin it appears, that 7 steamers and 3
sailing vessels are to be added to the Coast Survey Navy.
The crew of one of these vessels only is enumerated, to wit:
"The tender, Varina, is about 130 tons and carries some 60
men."  Perhaps it will be fair to say that these ten vessels
carry 500 persons.
Now, if, to the 237 persons confessed through malice, we
add the 800 and the 500 paraded through boasting, we have
a total, from data furnished by the Coast Survey itself,
which disposes at once and forever of the false pretense set
up by "Pub. Doc.," that, "on the United States Coast Survey, in both the landwork and hydrography, taking the officers of the army and navy and seamen of the navy all into
account, the number will not reach one-third of the force
employed on the English landwork, &c.," which force he
puts at "between two and three thousand persons."  And
that total, it will be recollected, is to be aggravated by the
number drafted from the War Department!' The United States have an extent of coast greater than
that of any two nations of Europe, a coast abounding in
dangers, &c.," says "Pub. Doc.," with the obvious intent of
suggesting to, the reader that the U. S. Survey embraces
more coast than is possessed by England and France together; and that it is increasedly dangerous in character.
Tilhe notion, that "the bydrographic surveys of England"




31
are confined to the coast of the island alone, is attempted to
be strengthened, by the exclusion of "the English Arctic
and Antarctic expeditions;" to which the courteous reader
is expected to refer the colonial and foreign surveys of that
government. The whole of this is an effort to belittle "the
hydrographic surveys of England," and to magnify the
objects and performances of the U. S. Coast Survey, and the
whole is false and fraudulent toward the public.
There is nothing but fraud in an attempt to confine the
hydrographic surveys of the power, "whose morning drumbeat salutes the rising sun, and, keeping company with the
hours, encircles the globe with the martial airs of England,"
to the coasts of the circumscribed island which is the seat
of that stupendous sovereignty. Let one "take the fwings
of the morning and fly to the uttermost parts of the earth,"
and he shall find it easier to meet than to avoid the hydrographers of England. "The hydrographic surveys of England" are, nearly, the hydrography of the world; and the
Admiralty will produce this day a better chart of the entrance to the harbor of New York than any projected by
the present Superintendent of our own Coast Survey; and
not only the best but the only charts of other coasts, so
remote and unfrequented that they are known to the U. S.
Coast Survey only by name. Our own line of coast, elongated as it is, is not to be compared in extent with the endless one contemplated by "the hydrographic surveys of
England."
At the hazard of again arousing the ire of "Pub. Doc.,"
a further quotation, pertinent to this comparison, will be
made from "one who, being dead, yet speaketh," the late
Thomas H. Benton. " Pub. Doc." says of him: " That Senator gained but one vote, besides his own, in afull Senate, and
when he was returned to the -Iouse, virtually abandoned
his position." The fact last stated is merely libelous; the
one first stated is good evidence of the truth of " LB. B.'s"
allegation, "that, in point of strength and efficiency, the




Court Survey was superior to the highest abilities, supported by great popularity, in positions of dignity and power."
Among the last labors of the departed statesman was the
preparation of his " Thirty Years in the U. S. Senate;" and
he is a bold man who charges that he " virtually abandoned
his position," when it is re-stated by him therein so recently as 1856. At page 726, of II Vol., " Thirty Years,
&c.," the reader will find as follows:
"Mr. BENTON. 3Iy object, M1r. President, is to return the
the Coast Survey to what the law directed it to be, and to
confine its execution, after the 30th June next, to the Navy
Department. We have now, both by law and in fact, a
Bureau for the purpose-that of Ordnance and Hydrography; and to the hydrographical section of this Bureau properly belongs the execution of the Coast Survey. It is the
very business of hydrography; and in Great Britain, from
whom we borrow the idea of this Bureau, the hydrographer, always a naval officer and operating wholly with naval
forces, is charged with the whole business of the coast
survey of that great empire. One hydrographer, and with
only ten vessels until lately, conducts the whole survey of
coasts under the laws of that empire —surveys not confined to the British Isles, but to the British possessions in the
four quarters of the globe —and not merely to their own
possessions, but to the coasts of all countries with which
they have commerce or expect war, and of which they have
not reliable charts-even to China and the Island of Borneo. Rear Admiral Beaufort is now the hydrographer, and
has been for twenty years; and he has no civil astronomer
to do the work for him, or any civil superintendent to overlook and direct him.  But he has somebody to overlook
him, and those who know what they are about-nanmely,
the Lords of the Admiralty-and something more besidesnamely, the House of Commons, through its select committees, anld by which the whole work of this hydrographer is
most carefully overlooked, and everything brought to the




test of law and expediency in its inception, and of economy
and speed in its execution. I have now before me one of
the examinations of this hydrographer before a select committee of the House of Commons, made only last year, and
which shows that the British House of Commons holds its
hydrographer to the track of the law-confines him to his
proper business; and that proper' business is precisely the
work which is required by our acts of 1807 and 1832.
Here is the volume which contains, among other things,
the examination of Rear-Admiral Beaufort (showing a huge
folio of more than a thousand pages), I do not mean to
read it; I imerely produce it to show, that, in Great Britain,
the hydrographer, or naval officer, is charged with the whole
business of' the coast survey, and executes it exclusively
with the men and ships of the navy; and having produced
it for this purpose, I read a single question from it, not for
the salke of' the ans:wer, but for the sake of' the facts in the
question. It relates to the number of assistants retained
by the Rear Admiral, and the late increase in their number.
The question is in these words: "In 1834 and 1835, you had
three assistants —one at three pounds a week, and two at
two guineas a week; now you have five assistants-one at
four pounds a week, three at three pounds, and one at three
guineas. Why has this increase been made?"
The answer was, that these assistants had to live in London, where living was dear, and that they had to do much
work —for example, had printed 61,631 charts the year
before. I pass over the answer for the sake of the question, and to contrast them with something in our own Coast
Survey. The question was, why he had increased the number of the assistants from three to five, and the compensation of the principal one from about $800 to about $1,000,
and of the others from about $600 to about $800 a year.
And turning to our Blue Book, under the head of Coast
Survey, I find the number of the assistants of our Superin4tendent rather more than three or five, and their salaries




34
rather more than six or eight, or eveln teln or twelve hundred dollars. They appear thus in the official list: One assistant at 03500 per annulm; one at $2500; three at $42000
each; three at $1500 each; four at $1300 each; tvwo at
$1000 each; two at $600 each; one draughtsman at $1500;
another at $600; one computer at, $1500; two ditto at
01000 each; one disbursing officer at $2000. All this in
addition to the Superintendent           a ehislf ni,45a00 as Superintendent of the Coast Survey, and $ 5()0 as Superintendent of Aeights and Mfeasures, wNithll tn assistant at at 2000 to
aid him in that business; with  all the paraphernalia of an
office besides.  I do not know what law -fixes either thle
-number or compensation of these assistants, nor do I know
that Congress has ever troubled itself to enquire into their
existence; but if our Superintendent was in England, \with
his long catalogue of assistants, tblh  question I have read
shows that there \would be inquiry there."
The speeci fiom  which tile preceding extract is taklen
was delivered by Mir. Benton in 1848, and in view of that
fact, a remark of "GB. B." is repeated: " If this Coast Survey needed retrenchment and reform t1hen, the cogency for
it now is greater by ten years farther illustration of its
abuses, and by at least as many millions Imore of cost."
Contrast the accountability to which the hydrographler of
England is held, and tile number and cormpensation of his
assistants, with the parallel features of the U. S. Coast
Survey.
A  review  of this matter of " comparison with foreign
surveys," establishes nothing calculated to take the Coast
Survey out of the category of institutions which, left to
themselves, become corrupt and burdenso-me.  In this case,
it enjoys the advantage of beinMg itself' allowed to state tilhe
force and cost of the enterprises Awith which it invites conpamrison.  Passing by, as irrelevant altogether, the twaddle
about trigonomet-rical surveys of territory in tile leallt of a
contillent, and rcnardini- what is stated concerClllng thle b1yN



35
drographic achievements of foreign countries, the United
States are behind them all in results, and beyond them all in
cost.
In twenty-eight years, and with an expenditure not differing a hundred thousand dollars from the mere congressional appropriations to our Coast Survey during the last
fourteen years, which congressional appropriations do not
probably cover one half the whole cost during that term,
the kingdom of France finished the surveys of its coast.
It is scarcely worth while to strive to parallel a work in the
state of our Coast Survey with un fait accompli.
The exact value in money of "the indirect levies upon
the public property and funds," made by the Coast Survey,
is not ascertainable without recourse to the Departments
which have borne them. It is believed, however, that they
far exceed in amount the sums appropriated directly to the
Coast Survey by Congress. It is not likely that since 1849
there has been a year in which a million of dollars has paid
the entire cost of the survey, and by its own showing " the
hydrographic surveys of England " have been prosecuted
upon half that cost, deducing it from an average of twenty
years. By the same showing, it appears'6 the hydrographic
surveys of England"  have been executed by an anliual
average of fifteen hundred persons, and unless the data extracted from Coast Survey authorities be erroneous, the
United States Coast Survey employs about the same number
of persons at precisely double the cost. If "Pub. Doc."
could have shown that "' not one-third " so many were eAmployed on the U. S. Coast Survey as upon the English, he
would but have demonstrated that we pay thrice instead of
twice as much for the same service, as that opulent nation.
The field of operations of our Survey is great indeed, no
inconsiderable portion of the coast of this continent; but
from that of "the hydrographic surveys of England," little
of all the coasts of this world is to be excepted. It is not
easy for national pride itself to escape the conclusion, that




36
neither in economy nor in efficiency, is our own to be put
in " comparison with foreign surveys."
Although the dishonesty of " Pub. Dec." is without
bounds, it must be remembered that a newspaper has 11.'s,
and much that is proper to be said is of' necessity reserL  I
for another opportunity. It is due to the occasion that the
statistics paraded by him  should receive special notice;
few-too few —apprehend their real value, even if founded
llpon fact. Nothing like them  hcas appeared since "  oz "'
performed for the " Mudfbg Association'" the same service
which " Pub. Doc." now  renders for tlhe Co-ist Survey.
Some elucidation of' one or two points raisedl by' 13. B.,",and which appear to have escaped the eye of I" Pub. Doc."
was intended.  The matters are important, and cannot be
treated in the limited space which remnains.  The character
also of the work, for wThich the Coast Survey enjoys Imuch
credit, will be discussed upon another occasion and perhaps
before another tribunal.
It may be, that enough has been shown already to demaonstrate this proposition; that the cost of the Coast Survey
" has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished."
The statesman who can read this controversy carefully, will
have reason to doubt his own fidelity to duty, if he does not
feel that he owes it to his country and to the Coast Survey
to leave no means untried to lessen its cost, to increase its
efficiency, and to confine it to its proper business.  Another
proposition, also established by the course of this controversy, is, that its cost no more needs abatemuent, than its
morals need aendcment.  The citizen who can contemplate
with indifference the use of such means of defence as have
been exposed, will have cause to distrust his own honesty.
Upon what system must an establishment be maintained,
which looks for defence to Falsehood, Fraud and Forgery?'I~'1