Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-07-23

Branches OF tn. State Bank ofr.nnessee, and
tha, these Branches had suspended specie
paymvtits some time in the summer Of the
previous year.
THESE notes. il will be seen. are not included
hnung The nncurrent notes which Mi. Ca"
ford acknowledges Ia have received, though
they were equally entitled TO that denotnins-
ton. / therefore submit the naked fact 10 the
Committee, that he did receive uncurrent
notes, To- a considerable amount, in another
cose, besides those specified in his report on
that subject.
Without positively denying this statement,
Mr.. Craw ford would seesI ~ impugu il, BY
alleging that Those notes were Immediately
placed 10 the credit 0f the Treasurer, AS cash,
by the Bank Of Tennessee. This, If ever 50
correct, cannot disprove the fact have al
lged. The notes, il the hands of the Urea
surer, were as much cash demand upon the
bank, as any entry it could IN Ike "n its books
upon the alleged transfer. Blu, had they been
paid the next day, it would not prove that
ihcy were not uUcurrent when received. They
however, remained at Louisville, from the
slst of May, $50, till January, 1922, aud have
only been discharged by payments in depre
ciated paper, to pensioners, and, possibly,
few ether public creditors SO that, if.ihe
Treasury has escaped IA loss, 1t has fallen upon
thnse WIN. were entitled To the gratitude and
tended to alirge any thing more upon this
subject than the mere fact that more incur
rent mites were received than has been stated
by Mr.. Crawford and, therefore, it is nnt in
cumbent upnn me To show, that the Treasury
has sustained any loss, or that the Bank of
Missouri has gained an advantage at the ex-
pense of the poor pensioners on the govern
ment. have not represented these (" as notes
OF insoivent banks" like those on some Of the
R...,Iy, ..f De-
no doubt, that as much might have been said
in favor Of the receipt of some ofthe other Ten
nessee notes, which Mr.. Craw ford acknOw-
Lodges were uncurren,, as Ut those ON the
Branches Of the Bank uf Tennessee. If, how
ever, am hound To pursue the subject further,
for my own justification, then certainly have
right TO call for, and should wish 10 see, tn.
proof on which Mr.. Crawford has predicated
the statements which he has made 10 the Com
mi,tee on this subject.
The next subject 10 which beg leave to
call the attention Of the COMMITTEES, is To my
fifth statement, in the following words, viz:
"That he has, in his report to the House,
mlsrepresentcd the obligations Of those banks ,or
some one of them, at least, and predicat-d
thereon an lndefensibIe excuse for his conduct
In receiving those uncurrent notes"
1t is evident, that / have been misappre-
hended in regard to this statement. / certainly
never intended to be understood, as alleged
that Dir. Crawford had misrepresenied tn.
CONTRACTS, which were submitted with his re-
port; for imysc!fr.led upon these contracts
and the fact that no public money had been
received by the Banks of Edwards lille and
Tombeckbe before the date Of their respective
contracts 10 pay cash for the deposites, for
proof of my allegation.
The Committee justly consider this state
meut as the recapitulati0n of charge prev ious-
ly made and il will be seen, that, for sp.ei-
hcation thereof, referred to a preceding part
OF The communication that contained il. This
is expressed in the following words, viz:
Being called on by resolution Of the
House Of Representatives to state the amount
OF uucarrent paper which he received from
the local banks that had been made the deposi
tories of public money, received from, the sale
OF public lands, he admits the receipt ola large
amount from the Banks of EJwardsy lille.
Missouri, and Tombecbe. But, as an excuse
for his conduct, he represents those notes to
have been deposited in these Banks before
the date OF their contracts, under which they
agreed to account for the public deposites rs
specie"
.iiy opinion certainly is, that any statement
which either adds TO, or dminishes, the real
obligations Of those Banks, must be misre.
presentation of their obligations and, taking
MIR Crawiprd's Statement to be correct, il i'm
plies the existence of obligations different frum
those contained in the contracts sub mitted
with his report !" for thu depusites could no,
have been made "-bsfore," the date Of those
contracts, without expressed or implied
contract tbereupon, which was not cOmmupl-
Gated, but which, from his statement, must bs
understood giving 10 those banks right to
tender the money which he received from
them.
My object, however was TO show that be
had nisstated the fact, Gin saying that the un-
current notes winch he received from the
Banks Of EdwardsyilIe and Tomheckbe, :" had
been deposited in these Banks before the DATE
OF their cont acis, under which they agreed to
account for the public depOsItes as specie."-
Aud this statement now beg leave to submit
to the decision Of the committee holding N.Y.
sell ready, VI the communities have any doubts
ON the subject, to show that those depOsiies
were made Isl these Banks after, and not
before, the date Of their contracts 10 pay cash
for them.
Mr.. Crawford has ahorrd 10 show tina, the
interest oil The western country required The
employment oil The local banks as depo STORIES
OIL pubic money. am not disposed to con-
test TINS point, nor ~ deny that judicious
employment OF solvent and prudent local
banks Tor THIS purpose, might have afforded
some relief, though the principal object which
he seems TO have had iu view WAS I'm r,.,;a,.
the Bank the United States from The ,diu,,
Of collecting the public reveniip and con, Inns
il into available fuIds, by Substituting the local
Banks for that purpose. According To his ar
range,nent. as he himself has des clipped il. his
intenten was to render the public money. nv
wh0insOrvpT collie cted as aiIabe wh.reysr ,h