The Alexandria herald. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1811-1826, 1824-05-19
ANSWER
~ TIE Secretary ofthe Treasury TO Me
Address of .Niniap Edwards.

fsQHI.TUS.
CONCLUDED FROM OUR LAsrl
D'scia'ming, then, in the mostSnousli
ned mapner, any wish or intention in the
secretary. OF ccDcealing any part of his
conouct IN relation TO those banks, the
opinion IS confidently repeated. that. at
'er an examination of all the correspon.
oe3ce mat has been, at various times.
y WmnhIcated TO the house, il will be
found that, although more annie details
are exhibited, because the papers snbse.
onently presented are more numerous. as
.'ear and faithful view of the connex.
ION between The western banks and the
neasnry,was presented under the first re.
so'uton,as is exhibited in the whole mass
OF The correspondence, But, ifthe fact
were otherwise, nothing could be more
unjust than 10 consider the omission nc
every iet'er not communicated urder
mat resolution, as suppression with an
improper design.
Although these explanations NAV he
deemed sufficient answer to Mr.. nj.
wards's charge of suppression, generally;
ye', there are some particular instances
which he has specially dwell upon. and
10 which he attaches particular imDor.
lance that 1t may be well specialIv In
notice. The first of these is,tbe circup.
stance thar extracts were communica.
ted, instead of entire letters, in parts of
the correspondence with the Planters
and Merchants bank of Huntsville,
ny referring TO the letters alluded 10.
and which have been transmitted entire,
under the last resolution of the house, il
will be seen, that the parts omitted To he
communicated, relate to an occurrence
wholly of "a temporary nature, entirely
unimportant III itself, and having no bear
ing whatever On the subject of the call
III seems, that, alter the termination of
The arrangement between the bank of the
y. States and the bank at Huntsville. the
Cashier of the former drew certain drafts
upon The amount standing at his credi, in
me later bank. These the bank a,
HUNTSVILLE declined 20 pay, under an er.
roDeous idea, that ii vas accountable IN
the treasury for the money
> As soon as this was made known tn the
secretary, he wrote 10 the Huntsville
bank, TO remove the MISUNDERSTANDING
The bank justified Itself, by quoting Ger.
tain expressions of the secretary's circu.
lar, of July, 1919. The secretary re.
Piled, that, # the bank had quoted cor.
rectly, the circular must have been i'm.
perfect, and desired to have il sent back
for examination. twas sent back : was
found to be inaccurately copied the
misunderstanding was removed the
drafts were paid and there the whole
matter ended. 10 the passages relating
TO this subject, notice was also taken of
the accidental omission OF the bank 10
render some returns. These are the
parts Of the letters in the correspondence
which were not communicated and this
explanation will show, with what little
reason it has been inferred, that eyery
omission in the correspondence contains
something which The secretary must have
aD improper motive 10 conceal
These observations apply 10 all the
extracts transmitted in that correspon>
deDce, except the letter of the presidep,
oil the Huntsville bank, of the SOth Sept.
1919. AS this letter does NOT appear TO
have been transmitted under the last re
solution, it is presumed to have been
misiaid. The purport of the preceding
part OF it, is not recollected, but search is
now making for 1t, and as soon as il IS
found it shall be communicated.
Al additional importance is attached
by Mr. Edwards, TO the circumstance OF
sextracts' being sent in this case, as con
traGictIng that part of the secretary's
testimony before former select com
mittee of the house, which, speak of
the correspondence generally states thar,
IN consequence of the pressure of bust
ness, the original letters and rough drafts
had been communicated under the reso
luton of the 18th Feb. 1922. No such
contradiction, however, can be imagined,
without misiDterPreting the obvious i'm
port OF the secretary's words. He spoke
of the communications generally and il
is fact well known, that il consisted al,
most entirely OF originals and rough
drafts. But It is irreconcIleabIe with
common sense, to suppose that he meant
to convey the idea, that papers which
bore on their face the tile of EXTRACTS,
which he had himself communicated and
described as EXTRACTS were either origi-
mails or rough drafts.
Neither the secretary nor MIR. Dickins
has any where said, in their testimony
as Mr.. Edwards supposes, that the latter
delivered all the originals and rough
drafts TO the secretary. and that The secs