Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1830-07-21

L
cial duty. which may have fairly ent,tled him TO
just remuneration iron the government? And has
he never read the explanation which Mr. n has CT
ven of this claim as it appears in the document p.
90-9t And it is not possible at least that instead
OF Mr. KS having brought forward these claims to
reduce the balance due by him, accomplished Au-
dltor may have rejected them, and many too, IN
his own summary style only to preserve the precious
balance against him, and so to make him out defsul
ter, ut ell events?
But writer asks further very piously "Who,
IN Heavens namo, authorized him to borrow money
for tho Government, aud then he unblushingly
forward. and says he might demand interest, &C."
But where. Pray, is the mighty harm in an agents
ado1neing money for the Government under which he
| acts, when the exigcncies OF the public service dc
mand immediate attention. Is il not, in fact the part
Of honest and active agent to and the Government
in this way? And IL IN DONG under peculiar cir
cumstances, he not only LAYS out his own money for
which no charges nothing but also borrows other
ney for which he hos pay interest himself is il any
thing but right and fair that he should ask the gov
eminent o relay him again, both the principal and
interest which he has thus paid for il. And why
should Dot the honest and faithful servant of three
ADMINISTRATIONS unblushiugly present his claims for
such dues to new Secretary land his AUDITOR who
had INTERESTINGLY turned him out of his Office upon
the most false and slanderous pretences' But our
writer adds: ''in what situation would the Trcasu-
~ of the United States be placed if ell dsbursing
officers should take liberties of this kind with the
Govornnrnt, and be contenanced in such demands
upon the Treasury Aye, and in what situation
would the pockets of the poor agents bo if their
claims for actual advances for the Government arc
to bo rejected Of course? And what risk can the
Treasury run from such liberties, when the Govern
ment has IN its own keeping and call upon its
disbursng officers to account al time it pleases.
fherc IS, besides no great danger, suppose that
all discussing officers should be guilty of advancing
money for the Government, as Mr.. X. has certainly
been, and especially after Tic reward which he has
got for his pnins. Ii turns out, however. AFTER ALL
and little unlucklly for writer's argument that
NJ hal r.1r
mands for his liberties of this kind" by this very
Audit is, of his claims for advances
nave hcen MISUNDERSTANDING, III fact, large part
of the money which he had borrowed for the Govern
ment fr"h the Bank. and yet the Treasury is safe!
Blu, our writer winds up neatly by saying rsry
co'"teousty: king has made of the public money
or suffered to be used oy others who took advan-
tage OF him and then shifted lis defaul; upon the
bank, o. &C. -iiere our writer Is evidently dispo-
Sod to take the view vi the which was 80 adru-
y presented by the arch Auditor for the use OF any
poor Suspicion who might be wiling TO be delued by
It The clui,n Of the Rnnk, as It was called in the
report, was IN fact the gross bait which the artsul
angler threw out for the gudgeons who were
ready and waiting to swallow down at once and he
must have been almost equally surprised and delight
ed no doubt, TO find our supple and slippery eel AL
most as knowing one as h,msc!f) wriggling shout,
IN this wuy on his hook Yet SO is; for our editor
goes on to say: "Mr King in his reply to Mr. Kendall
seems indignant at the nttemp, TO blend his loan from
the Bank with his oficia! accounts and thus 10 make
him out defar;cr But how could il b. other wise,
These advances made by the Bank for p,,biic
purpose, and the account was kept signed Miles
hing, Navy Agent" Exacily this is precisely wbaf
Mr. X has stated; and is for Ltai uery reason that
he has right to be indignant at the attempt of the
Auditor to make him dcfaul:cr by the hclp of
this loan from the Bank. For if this loan from the
Bank was for public purposes and really part of
Mt Kings account, against the Government, and i'll
1t had, moreover been actually allowed 20 him for
the greater part Of IL least) where was the BRO
Of,ta Il. ,,l.
ing 1t on the face ofthe of his account and
on the debit side oft toI-And was it not obviously
fraudulent attempt TO shew &r X. off defaulter
to the government BY holding him up debtor to The
Bank; and this upon the false pretence that the Bank
had set up claim against the Government, for the
oan TO him? o, but we were told, 1.-THE Bank did not
ook to the U. States for repayment" Now Mr. |
I wall be remembered. has expressly stated in his
answers To Messrs. Branch and Kendall, that tic |
Bank did not lock to the Government Except through
him, and It might have occurred to our writer that he /
would hardly have hazarded this assertion here in the
very face of the bank, if it had not Seen certainly
true. Yet our writer still asks: "Can any doubt be !
entertained upon this subject after reading the fol
lowing documents!" and he gives the Secretary's
letter Of Oct. 80 1899, aud Mr. New,on's of Oct. |
sh same year. at full length Bur did our writer
read these letters? If he did, did he understand
themf For they certainly corroborate instead Of
Mr.. KS statement on this point Mr.
KS statement remember, that the Bank never /
went forward to set up claim against the Govern
neht, TOT the money WhIch he had borrowed from /.
Tor the public servce but was alway s perfectly well
satisfied to let him 60 md settle his account inci,-
ding 1t, IN his own way but that the Secretary had
subsequently inUed the Bank to shew him this part
OF Mr.. r. account, md thee turned about with n
grace, and gave himsefte air of refusing
10 allow IT. and not satisfied to do so, had &c uuy
Paraded Vt as IT it had been urged by the Bank for
the dishonest purpose of casting an odium on Mr..
take MIR. Newton 8 letter Of the 9th Oct.
addressed to the new Navy Agent here and read: ~
checrfully comply with the request Of the Secretary
Of The Navy communicated in your note Of this date
Is II not PLAIN from his, that, as Mr.. X states the
Bank did not Doos or 60 forward III the affair; but
that The Secretary requested the Navy Agent here
to call upon the Bank for a copy of The account
And why, by the way is neither the Secretarys let
ter to the Navy Agent, nor the Navy Agents note
to MI Newton given to the public among these docu.
rnents' Is IT because they would make his fact still
more apparent; and have therefore, been prudently
Kept bsc.' II may be observed, however, that MI
uses the phrase: "Fhe claim of this office nOo;,s,
ne Government amounts to SiO,i44 H." &c. ana
TINS may be supposed to imply that the Bank did re-
gard the loan TO Mr. X in the light Of claim araios,
the Government. But, OIL the contrary, have IL
from good authority, That these words arc only tho
echo OF Mr.. JPpfands note i'm which tbcy 49,