Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-05-07
ADDRESS OF NINIAN EDWARDS,
presented to The House Of Representatives. ,y tie
SPeake'', .4p,,i 10, 1924.

/
(which would not venture to refer to, if / had
not his answer to it, say, &c beg leave most
respectfully to suggest, that it would be but an
act Oh justice to present my publication of 1919,
In which declared would be no LONGER res
ponsible for the bank of TEdwardsviile1 in any
way whatever. This publication was con.
tanned In the st. Louis Enquirer, which I he.
he'e you took at that time. II was also con-
tanned IN paper which forwarded to YOU N.Y.
sen INA u toas enclosed, ano,eie,rcd 10, n, d.
iette'Jron' Cot. Stephenson, the President orfhe
i5d'nc, and the Receiver also to you, ,osicR let
ter, ne Informed me, had occ,, answered. Since
| the fall OF 1919, my connexion with that bank
| has entirely ceased. except that am stock
holder In 1t, without, however, ever having bor-
rowed one cent from it.n
| In my letter to MIR. Crawford, of 18th Febru-
airy, 1922, say to him, s' must, however, saw,
sir, that as the information in the Treasury De-
Partment, relative 10 my original recommends
ton of the Bank of Edwarylsyille. has. for some
tune past, been distinctly understood, 6, freely
used at this place, Washington I can but con
sider 1t somewhat unfortunate for me, that othe;
Communications IN the Department, which OUGHT
| to have terminated all responsibility on nv mar,
have not been equally known. Ti,atI was the
cause OF the depositcs being made there. in tho
INST instance freely acknowledge. But, that
| L unequivocally declared would not be held
way whatever, after the fall of 1919; that ,,ou
'cere notified thereof as due time; that The depo-
sites have not been continued there, i'm consc-
quence ofTy recommendation since that perioJ
and that the bank was then in good situation.
may, think, according TO my present i,nnres-
sions, fairly insist upon. And, if so. the partial
information, now in circulation, at this place. is
not calculated to do me that justice, which I
hope, have right to expect from your mag
n fh<a,-N
pleasure, assure you, sir, that the whole of my
conduct, in relation to that business, should be
so fully known to be no longer misuuder
stoodn
The first of these letters was written five DAYS
before his report of the 18th February. 1892
The second bears the same date of the latter.
they must both therefore, have been written
before any charge of suppressions had been
made, or suggested.
Had the existence of the Receivers letter
been denied, or the slightest intimation Of ques-
tioning 1T, been given at the time it was thus as
serted, could, and would have proved every
fact contained in my statement in regard to Il
by that gentleman himself. But he is now dead
.ur Crawford knew this, before he made the
report In queston,-and dead men cannot con-
tradict living ones.
No one can read the heterogeneous that were
put TO me, by the committee, and believe that
| m feS.
tmohy, before the date of his letter to the chair
man OF the same committee, which was eleven
days later than my examination. From the
nature of the inquiries which he was then called
upon to answer, they afforded as suitable an oc-
cason, as the one he has selected, for questions
ing my credibility. Why, them has he SO long
postponed it? One thing is certain it never
could have been undertaken with greater hopes
of success, than whenit wasS supposed l should
| how ,t,, cI-c...
| l will now submit to your honorable BODY n
few remarks, to shew that the negative state
ments of Mr.. Crawford, and his Sc officers of the
Treasury Department." however confidently
| relied upon by him for my total overthrow are
too conclusive for his purpose.
You have been informed by him. that preyi-
GUS to the calls for his correspondence with the
| local banks, which were made the repositories
of public money, it had been usual to refer all
such calls to Mr.. Jones, his chief clerk, but
that in these cases, another clerk had been Sc
lected to collect the letters, sc. which were
called for, Why this change was made, at that
particular juncture, (being wholly unaccounted
| for by Mr.. Crawford,) is left to conjecture.
| Was MIR. Jones incompetent to the discharge of
this duty? The very station he holds in the
| Department forbids such supposition. Had he
proved himself unworthy of confidence? If So
he could not have retained his station; and
such is acknowledged to be his stern, unyield-
ing, inflexible integrity, that no one could have
supposed him capable of subservency in any
unfair purpose. confess / regret that the
charge was made for, had it not been, can
not resist the belief, that | should have been
spared much of the labor of this yindication.
But, without yielding to unayailing regrets,
must be content to take things as find them. |,
therefore, proceed TO examine tie testimony
that is offered against me.
This is substantially, LIST. That no such let
ter from the Receiver [as that mentioned in my
examination is to be found in the files of the De
partment. 2. That the officers employed in il
have no recollection of the receipt ofsuch let
ter. And 3. That the records of the DEPART
ment do not show that it was answered.
Surprising it to be true, that this letter can
not be found Gin the files of the Department. y
it by no means proves that il was not received by
Mr.. Crawford.
This is not the first occasion on which have
had to regret that a lctterby him could not be
found when it became necessary for my de-
fence.
Finding nyselfgrossly nisreprescntcd in re-
lation TO letter had written to him, and be-
ing determined TO vindicatc myself against the
insinuation that were predicatcd upon it, wrote
to BIN on the 9TH Jan. 1921, requesting CO.
Ply oft. In his reply, dated 9th January, 82I,
he says, The letter which you have described
in yours Of the 5th inst. has been sought for in
vain. Mr.. Jones states that, according TO the
best Of his recoilection he considered it not of a
description to 60 on the files, and that conse-
quently it was not filed. IF his recollection is
correct it accounts for the absence Of the letter
from the files, and it being lost or nisIaid." My
letter being thus disposed OF, Mr.. Crawford, IL
his answer, impiiediy repeated one Of the Dsinu-
ations above referred TO. This was promptly re-
1 II -, 4 -.