Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-07-15

i
ime OF IT'S arrival here, aud I, therefor supnos
must have been about the 10Th or 18th Vi ,h
month.
O. You intended, Then, that il should arrive tl
latter part Of that week!
A. knew from The time delivered il to DO M, i,
me nial that u could not arrive before that tine
and intended IL should zIrse by the due course
mail
Do you know when the copy Of your Address
was finished I?
do NO, know the particular day but I think
thar the copy, SO far AS made, was sent on
10y the first mail alter II was finished. Aud that Il
was seat IN the mail hefore the org'nai was sem,
" Please 10 read this address IN the Washington
Republican ofJapnay 20, 1928, sgned A B, and
address TO Gales & Seaton IL that the pubLt a,on
10 winch you refer ia one OF The 4. B. pulicat ons
Audrcss)
/ A. ID is.
q. Were you not just about TO leave Edwardsviile
Wnen the messenger from tue House Of Representa-
A. exptci should have left it for New Odeans
| ~ about three days.
| e. Did you find, in your examination OF the olicc
Oh tho Receiver, any ieer from the Secretary Of the
lteasuty,.to which that conversation could possibly
reier, WHICH you had with MI. Stephenson, alter
your ietorn from Congress, Respecting the letter he
~ said 10 have written IL II Ocober, except The
leu-.s Of the FIRST VI November, 1919, nud the 2Oh
April, 1920!
A did not.
G lteuInd you that in the 4th quarter Of 1919
there was deposite ofupwards Of $50, 900, made
by Mr.. Stephenson, in the Bank OF Edward svie, and
ASH You, whether you think il possible he could
have ieeIrsd ia that conversation 10 The Letter of The
20.h of Apr, 1890?
| a Ache ''me of that conversation did not know
villa deposites lie had made after ~ OrtnIcr, 1919,
nor &c what am"umi. Iihnk IL possible he al ~ Ia.
| 'ri,rred TO the letter OF APRIL 1920 although, CON
sd"r that the letter Of the Lit November, 1872 was
the letter wiir-n IN consequence Of the Receivers
ieter Of The 18th OF Octoer preceding The letter
| OF November direcs the Reviewer Ia depos,e the
money he should have in his hands on tho ST day of
that month, in The Bunk Of Ew.rdsviI!e bu, think
u con'a'ns no express oder IN regard future de-
posfes letter OF The same daa WAS written lay
MIR. Crawford 10 The Cashier Of that hank, with an
enclosure, and the paper ! have presented TO The
| committee, was delivered TO me iy the Cashier OF
the Bank, as being that enclosure, from which IL
would appe@E hai both the Receiver AT kaskask,a
aud az Ed~nrIsviiIe, had heen directed 20 make
then iu'ure d'posIes IN the 'nk Of Missouri, unli
Otherwise ordered. And IL appears by the leuer of
| the 2Oh April, that the Receiver at Edaardsvile
was specially recied TO make his deposiies in the
| Bank Of Edwads,ilie. Being Tho President Of the
bank, 10 the Cashier OF which The letter directed
he may have supposed he bound TO take notice
of the nfot malion which natural TO sup, ose
he must have received concerning the order
ed IN that enclosure. But these all
| versaon alluded TO, and cannot undertake 10 sa,
| what letter it WAS the Receiver referred to ia tina,
conversation.
| @ Do you know that in January ard February
1920, Notwithstanding this circumstance, he dd
| make dep"s'tes in tue Bank Of Edwardsviiie
A. do not J was at Congress during the time
spoken OF, and thave no recollection Of having
known any Thug Al that time concerning the depo-
sites all kn"w on the suffice is from recen, pub.
locations. am under The impression riia during the
winlei tuccetding the lefier OF The LIST November,
| either Col Johnson or myself written 10 on The
subject OF the enclosure above spoken OF, hut my
collections is so lnds,,nci, that cannot speak will,
any certainty about il.
| Q. II rs stated IN account curren, Of Benz Sic
phenson with the United States, printed with Nj.
Crawlord's publication, ordered to lie printed III,
llih OF May, No. Is, iha, there WAS cas- ,epos d
the Bank 81 Eu,varusyti,e a Tire i
lG20 amounting 10 So SEC 81, aud another account
No IL, that there was cash dcpost-d IN tue same
bank, 10y Stephenson, on the 90 February, g, 1871
u h.se statements are tue, do You now think pos
sibie that the letter ofihe 20h April the leueI
alluded TO IN that conversation before mentioned with
Stephenson
A. still think it possible. His own letter beng
silent the subject Of the future deposires, he
have thought that that would have justified him II
continuing TO make those drpos'tcs; and yet, from
the enclosure above referred 10, Mr.. Crawford MA,
have intended 10 prohibit their being made there.
have already stated that my impression IL, that Col
johnson, or myself, received Letter the subject
Of that enclosure, and suppose the enclosure and
the Receivers letter together may ir.ve occasioneJ
the aner some uncertainty how he was TO act.
@. You speak Of your impressions concerning u
letter To yourself or Col. Johnson. BY whom was
that letter written
A. My Impression is that IL was written by The
President oihe Bank, who also the Receiver,
Col. Johnson's hrothe r-i-law holding very large
potion OF the stock Of That bank, he has been princ
paiiy relied upon for years past, make all
negotiations with Mr.. Crawford eonce rnug il that
have been made here, and we have generally hal
conversation upon the subject when he has bad TO
~ those cases. IL received the letter, doubt
was communicar ed IN him and fhe received one,
| is equally probable thar IL was shewn 10 me.
q Do you know that the Receiver n; Edwards.
willie saw thai pager, called the enclosure in the
letter of LIST November?
A. Ofmy own knowledge, do not, bu, should
think il very strange if he had H., lie beng
| the President of the bank.
| @. IN exrmiuiug the records in the Receivers
office, did you see letter from Mr.. Crawford OF the
| lst Noveu,be
| + A. I did
@. Does II contain any direction In The Receiver
| 10 dep1sits moneys III the INK Of Missouri
/ A. think not. have already stated ba, believe
il is silent to his future depose sfcr The one there
in specially referred 10
| @. The letter 10 the Receiver, Of Let Nover'her,
and he enclosure OF winch you speak, diner ~ 'h's
| respect. That part Of the enclosure whcb relates
10 the Bank Of Missouri is not fonnd IN the letter to
| the Receiver. Is tbs'e not this difference
| A. The letter which ! saw NJ the Land Office ~
from NJ Crawford TO the Receiver, oi
! N,yenber Is 1919, feel confident contains 40 d.
| rec,ions 10 make the dcposite in the Bank Of Ms
souri, bu, is sdea, have before stated as TO ru-
| tute drposiies.
/ O. Could the Receiver, if he had seen this q nclo.
sure have doubted aboui the proprieiy of continuing
his deposites, with the letter OF the ist Nov 10 his
! hands
| A. think he could.
Q In giving your advice to tie Receiver in The Fail
OF 1919, did you give IL in The character Of his friend
or rs person holding high place in the govern
men', with aview to promote the public interest?
A. Al that time l had lost confidence in bank
generally, so much so that did not wish 10 he held
responsible for any bank. advised The Receiver
asa Trend TO him, and also with view TO free ~y-
self OF all responsibility for the bank, iy placing
things in such situation that Mr.. Crawford could
ponsibi'ity, leaving The funds in the Receivers hands,
| entirely 10 his control.