Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-05-18


HE "f no snch Interpretation. That which h.
chiefly relies upon is the omission of the Re-
ceiver at Edwardsvie tn make his deposites
IN the Edwards,ille Bank, in the 4th quarter
oil 1919 which he states was in Consequences
~ hls publication aud advice and he asks
"heiher II is la be believed that the Receiver
wou'u nave withheld the drposites contrary
I" the Secretary's orders, without giving him
a reason, and whether, ir he had done so, the
secretary would not have called him to ac-
| count.
Inc means exist, in the monthly returns of
inc N'cri'er, and the correspondence between
HIM and the Secretary, ON record in the De-
par'men', oy the aid of which, this may be in-
vestigatrd Copies Of these papers are here
with transmitted
by these II w'lI be seen, that the first in
sirucii"ns given la the Receiver, tn make his
deposites IN the Bank of Edwaldsviiie, were
| oil the 2lst Dec. 1918; that, in pursuance
ot these Instructions, he made his first tirpo-
| site in that Bank on the 28ti, February, 1919,
OF $4,000, at which time he retained i'm his
possession balance of S20,O92. On the 3Ist
March, he deposited $4,000, and retained "a
balance OF 1900. On the SOth April, he
deposited S3,86l, and retained S 1919. In
! May, ne made no dpposite and in June, only
SO l79, retaining Si014S and from that time
tn the 3Oih December, he made no deposite.
Whence il appears, that, with the exception
OF a small sum, in June, amounting to less
than one thlrd OF the money then on hand, he
made no deposte betw cen the last of April and
the last OF December, period of eight
months; during which he retained an increas-
ing balance of from 90, OeO To $4,000! and
that even on the last of December, he did not
pay over, by about 10000, all the money
| then IN his possession.
Instead ola withholding Of the depostcs in
the AIN quarter of The year here is Il retention Of
them, with the exception before noticed, for
eight months. II was scarcely contrnded that
all these omissions Of duty were the result of
the advice given by MIR. Edwards 10 the Re-
ceiver, To withhold the deposies, until he. could
receive the Secretary's instructions. On the
contrary, 1t will he sliewn, by the correspoB-
dence, AS far as il is susceptible of being
shewn, negatively, that no part of these mo-
neys Vas withheld from deposite, upon that
pretsXt.
w the 9th Of August, at about which time
the H"criv"t's monthly return, for June, was
received, the Secretary wrote to the Receiver
to know, why he retained the public moneys
IN his hands, contrary To his instructions, and
informing him, that, as there was IA bank at
his place of residence, there could be- no ex
cuse for his doing so.
On the 18th al September, (sre No. COY Mrs.
Stephenson, the wife Of the Receiver, an
swered TINS letter, IN consequence of the alb
sence OF her husband and informed the Score
tary, that, from whar she had heard in con
versation, between the Receiver and Others,
SHE believed he had retained the money to
meet the drafts of certain public agents in thar
country, which the Secretary had authorized
him TO purchase. Aud it is t" br obsery ed,
that though tins was the fall of 1919" Mrs.
Sfan Il
publication or advice.
On the first of November. fsre No. e3) the
Secretary wrote again to thu Receiver, COM
pla ming OF the continued detention or tn public
money IN his hands, which he presumed had
been the result of his letter Of the 9th cf April,
(see No. ~ and directed, that immediately on
receipt OF this letter, he will pay into bank
the whole ofthe public money in his posses :
sion on the 30th inst" and farther instructiug
him not 10 consider the letter oflhe 9Th Of April,
as authorizing him to retain the public money
in his hands at the end ofeach month Here,
1t appears, that, so far from a,trbnting the
Withholding Of the depnsites TO the cause
alleged by Mr.. Edwards, the Secretary at
tributes il TO the cause assigned by slrs.
Stephenson, in her letter of Sin of Sept And
| II IS worthy of remark, that this is the last
letter on record from the Secretary 10 the Re
ce'ver, IN relation tn the depOsites in The wear
| 1919; and that this was The last letter written
10 him. on that subject in that year, will APP
1 pear by reference made to il, in letter from
the Secretary 10 the Receiver, of the 2O;h of
April 1890. (see No. e6) which is more parti-
cuIarly noticed hereafter.
On the 28th October, (see No 22) the
Receiver. who had then returned home. wrote
to the Secretary, acknowledging the receipt
of letter of the els; of September, (see No.
81 with new form of an account current.
On the 5th Of November, (see No. 2l) the
Receiver wrote tn the Secretary, enclo.ng
draft, which he had purchased, transmitted
his monthly return for October, and noticing
small error in his account for August.
On the 18th of November, (see No 25l he
again wrote to the Secretary, enclosing the
I'd of the draft, which he had transmitted on
the 5th But, in all this time, there was no
allusion to Mr.. Edwards's publication and al
vice although " the fall ofl3i9," was now
nearly gone.
A last, on the 5lst of December tsee No.
~ the Receiver made dpposile in bank 10
consequence, IL is fairly to be Inferred, 0f tn.
ptremptory order of the Secretary of the Ist
OF November, and in consequence 0fthat only
That Mr. Edwards's publication and advice
were not the cause Of the retention of the
money, by the Receiver, before the I3.h Of
| September, is manifest from Mrs. Stephen
sons letter Of that date
| That no such cause Of retention existed,
within the knowledge Of the Secretary, before
| the 1st OF November, is manifest from hrs let.
| ter OF that date. 1.-THE receiver had, at any
| time between the date Of his wife's letter and
OF bis own letter OF the 1Gih Of November
made the communication alleged by Mr. Ed
wards, u IS to be presumed that he would, in