There is another piece of testimony, which serves to quicken suspicion. It is already admitted by the Secretary of War, that, after refusing Mr. Remington because he was an agent of France, bids were accepted from Thomas Richardson, who was in point of fact an attorney-at-law at Ilion, and agent and attorney of Mr. Remington. But the course of Mr. Remington, and his relations with this country attorney, are not without official illustration. Since this debate began I have received a copy of a law journal of Paris, “Le Droit, Journal des Tribunaux,” of January 18, 1872, containing the most recent judicial proceedings against the French Consul-General at New York. Here I find an official report from the acting French Consul there, addressed to the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, under date of August 25, 1871, where a fact is described which was authenticated at the Consulate, being an affidavit or deposition before a notary by a clerk of Mr. Remington, on which the report remarks:-- “This declaration establishing that this manufacturer caused the books of his house to be recopied three times, and in doing so altered the original form.” The Report adds:-- “It is in this document that mention is made of the character, I might say criminal, which the name of Richardson appears to have assumed in the affairs of Mr. Remington.” After remarking that the witness who has thus testified has exposed himself to the penalties of perjury, being several years of imprisonment, the Report proceeds:-- “You see from this that the operations of Mr. Remington give only too much of a glimpse of the most audacious frauds.” Here is testimony tending at least to stimulate inquiry: Mr. Remington’s books altered three times, and the name of Richardson playing a criminal part. I quote this from an official document, and leave it. * * * * *