The Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1822-1829, 1824-05-25
CONTROVERSY BETWEEN
y. Edwards and ". II. Crawford.
ANSWER
of!he Secretary Of The Treasury 10 tie I'd
dress Of .htntan Eluardg.
ANStV Err
TRfAsrRY DEPhHrMENT,
NV Alh. lAsl.

TRfAsuRY DEPARTMENT.
Alay 8lb, la24.
The Secretary Of the Treasury has had
the honor In receive the litter Of the Hon.
Mr.. FLOYD, chairman Of select committee
of the House OF Representatives,, dated on
The 18th ult. transmitting the Address OF
Nioian Edwards and expressing the rea-
diness Of thr committee To receive any
communication winch the Secretary may
think proper To make, IN reference to the
same, aud he nov submits the following
remarks IN answer 10 the accusations con
tanned in that address
Bnl before he enters upon IN examina-
ton of the subject of the ADDRESS, he
think II due II min6rf to disclan1 the inn
pn'gfion of having taken advantage of the
moment Of Mr. Edwards departure to
aualgn the testimony which had been Civ
en- by hir before former select commit
tee olthe House. As the Secretary had
no recollection of the communications Ia
which lhat testimony referred, and as they
were not on record IN the Treasury De
p.rtmeot, BE considered himself bound to
state the tact : and the occasion which was
presented by the Transmission TO the House
Of other papers relating to the same subject
appeared Il suitable one for making the
statement. The terms IN which il was
made will show that no dlsresprct towards
Mr. Edwards was intended. And, if the
occasion WIS not earlier presented, the de
lay, 50 far from being caused or sought by
the Secretary, was produced by cmcnm
Stances beyond his control. For reasons
II. 4
papers could not then be- Transmitted and
although considerable eNertlon WAS used, il
was moi until the day on which they were
sent to Tie House, that the preparation of
them was completed.
Ii IS mol deemed necessary, IN this com
munlcatlon, ta recdpltaatc the injurious
allegations contained IN the " address -
The lateness of the session requires Dies
patch and this answer shall be brief and
explicit.
Tn frst charge to be noticed relates to
two letters which Mr.. Edwards, in his tes-
tmony before the committee, on the 18th
February, 49,, had stated To have passed
between The kccriter ri Public Moneys 1t
Edwards, llIr, and thc Secretary OF the
Treasury, and which, not having been com
inundated 10 The House under the rcsolu-
tons u the Oh January, l822, and 18th
March, l&22, agreeahly 10 Mr. Edwards's
alleged expectation, aud which the Score
tary having stated To be neither on file nor
ON record In the Department, nor to be
rccollrcted by himself or his officers, hc
IS accused ot having suppressed or de
med
As the resolutions under which, it IS ale
ged thai these letters should have been
communicated, call only for the ooIrespon
dence between certala banks" and the
Secretary, II II unnecessary 10 explain why,
among the httefs which were communiCa-
led, any correspondence between e" Re
celver' & the Secretary was mott to be found.
Nor IS il easy 10 imagine how any oue, in.
formed al the tenor of those. resolutions,
shoeil have entertained the expectation of
seeing the letters in question, among the
p prrs which were trans lifted.
The blame Of not having communicated
these supposed letters having been thus
easily removed, by referring 10 the terms of
the resolutions themselves, which show
that no such letters we're called for the
next question is, whether such letters ever
passed between the palties*
In the absence Of all direct Re 5timony, in
support Of his assertion, Mr. Edwards has
resorted 10 probabilities and has endcav-
ored In inicr a confirmation Or corrohora-
ton in lis favor from circumstances that are
susceptible of 10 such interpretation. That
which he chiefly relies on is the omission
Of the Receiver At Edwarlsyllr To make
his dpnosi{ps n, tbr Edw1rIeyiIlp RanL ~,