Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1830-08-10
POHITT1AG
From tho Norfolk Beacon.l
'HE ANSWER OF MILES KING,

As the Fourth Auditor has done the singular hon
the dignity of his office and write long and
elaborate reply my to his first libel,
" called his Report ought, perhaps TO acknowledge
the favor he has done me, by taking some notice OF his
second and shall do at once. shall not, however,
deem either necessary proper, after the full expo
sure which have already made of his arts TO rejon
full length, or in minute detail-Indecd, the APP
parent weakness well faehood, of this new fab.
ricaton in parts Of it, must have gone far with all
candid and competent readers to prove unworthy oil
credit in any. AT the time, the precious confes-
sions and retractons, in spite Of HIMSELF which IL con-
tains, and which have evidently been rung from him by
the pungent applcaonof truth, together with the fresh
shifts and turns and inventions of SANDER TO which he
has been driven by the power, must be fairy re-
gar,led confession Of judgment, conviction OF
guilt, all the former points in dispute between u.s.
SHALL therefore, pass over, on the present OCCASION
great many pervesons and suppressions OF fact and
nnumerabe suggestions and nsinuaons oil ia'sehood,
which artfuy and curisusly interviewer in almost
every line Of this precious paper, and conne myself az
far possible TO brief review OF the old grounds oil
our controversy, and proper notice of the matter,
Tor rather prus which he has introduced into this
cond trav all of his brain.
Now, the reader will have the goodness 10 remem-
Der, that the only questions which have underta-
ken to discuss before the public, are those which the
Secretary and Auditor had wiuly raised by their Re-
ports, and which hrst whether was in default
the Government on the llth August, 1929, when was
removed from my Office on that ground and, secondly
whether have, in any instance, acted dishonesty or
dshonorably, either in the business of my agency, or
in my subsequent attempts TO settle my accounts Ii
was, in fact their a'se and slanderous unpuations on
my character man OF probity and veraciiy in reia
did not therefore, certainly, think Of proving my
account in my to their Reports; for L knew
perfectly we'll that would be entirely impossible TO do
il in this tody have asserted, indeed, that have
claims against the Government 10 the amount OF about
$50 900, for various items; and as cannot sue the CO.
yernment have challenged the Secretary to order suit
aganst me, for the small balance now standing 10 my
debit and thus TO afford me opportunity OF proving my
account in proper manner and before an impartial int
bun l. This is, evidently, the only way in which thar
question of the justice Of claims can be fully and
fairly tried In the meantime, am quite content mat
any one should form his own opinion upon It, II no
chooses, and thinks il right, 10 do upon the very
imperfect and manifesty insufficient facts which have
been, or be- exhibited before him in this mode OF
communication. 1t is enough for me, that the decision
of that question: either way, must leave my integrity at
least without rcproach. do not, therefore, intend TO
discuss il now shall suffer my adversary TO with
draw my attention, and that of the public, as he would
gladly do from the true and only points in dispute be-
tween us in this controversy These points, again re-
peat, first, in default to the Government on
the Ilth August, 1920, when was removed from my
office groud and secondly, have i, in any in
stance acted dishonesty dshonoTably, either in the
business OF my agency my subsequent attempts TO
settle nv accounts These and these only the points
which shall agan,m briefly apply the facts OF tho
1 case.
eminent the lllh August 1920, when | was dis
missed from my Office on that ground? Now, lie OBJ
servabie that neither the Secretary nor The Auditor
has down 10 this day. nded to furnish the pub
lie with any distinct and inNeig6Ie evidence to es
'abisb this noint. They have got up together their
Letter and port, Auditor tenfesses, for
the sole purpose OF jusfyirg or excusng their pro-
ceetfngs against me- by making 1t out, they could.
nd have they done il: Where and wha, is the proof
Of III Let the reader AK himself this question, and then
lay bis finger, IL he upon any part OF the docu
ents, any fact in the case, separate from,
BILE or tangible FORM cannot be done Our Audi
tor has showed indeed. that in the settlement OF my
accounts, as far as IRE hare proceeded and disposng
| of my claims and vouchers in his peculiar
ner and rejecting, rejecting aud rejecting, afIoays TO
suit himself, he has contrived TO make me in debt TO
the Government, in the small sum OF S3,s3s-and no
| (pNtt larn into rnto
account of the ship house, which our Auditor says,
'' ultimately be allowed. ISL claim for money
paid Graham for bread. which he admits now, "may
be readily adjusted" SLAB SIS claim for money
paid Waddey for rice which have fully proved, $5ll
0S cts; and claim for oney paid st led for beef end
pork TO which he find objection, but that pitfu
little quihble shout the two barrels taken on board the
Alert, s. 500 r. These sums together are, obviously
than stiff lent extnguish the apparent balance
against me, and bring the Government in my debt
Indeed, may add that the rect6caton of error of
| So $50 96, which find / made against myself, in
my return for June 30 h. 1922 would of itself, very
nearly produce the effect am not, then, in de-
fault TO the at the present time; and our Au-
dor, IL fact comedies much: for he says "he ques
ton is is he in default but ,cas he &c But il am
in default now, is entirely plain that could not
have been g, on the llIh August, 1929, Er hare Of
course disbtrsed nothing for the Government since
that time: Ard il is, in fact only by our AUDITORS viii
fol cton Of many Of my claims for previous dsburse
ments that the Government has been kept from being
az apparently it /. realty in debt to 10 consdeTa
BILE The main charge, therefore, that was in
default TO the Government the lth August, 1929
when was removed from my offics that ground, is
thus, plainly and palpahly, demonstrated TO be false.
Oh! hut il s said that | toouid haze been in default
| 10 the Government, and in pretty round too. TO
wiz in the amount Of 44,47 81 il the honorable Sec
retary had refused honor my acquisitions for the
$40 600 which obtained from the Bank for the pub
lie service, and very Handsomely and adroily
sged TO throw off my ,ootHd haze been default for the
larger part Of il, upon that institution. Nov, in tho
FIRST place this is shifting Of the ground Of accusa-
ton against me, which proves that the first position
taken was wholly unteDable. The starting Of the
ne assertion that mould hare been in default, Is in
fact an abandonment Of the cid charge that So
and admits, what contend for, that ID1s NOT But il
/. worthy Of note that this allegation that
tOouli hare been in default TO the Government cannot
be made out, Cuen in appearance without a dishonest
and deceptive Of this Of = 5000 which drew
from the BankThe "caim OF the Bank" IL is call
ed H. in fact the false card which accomplished
artist uses all lions TO sheto o default
ter; aud although have fairly caught him in the act
in HE fret open an bsrefacsd trick with II, he is now
! trying the same juggIe in anoih r, and
vert form which shall again, and easily, expose.
Besr in mind, en that the Secretary, in HE letter,
represented his sun Of $40 900 cl.im growing
cut Of my agency, which the Bank had "set up, and
which in point Of view admissible;" and our
Auditor following him in hs report, (or rather going
before bim actually proceeded to Get down the rum in
figures part Of my account with The Government,
saying, "the actual smount OF M Kirgs default 10
thu Government and 10 the Bank l. Si4479 81. in
Guiding my rejected claim for Scrdntou's stone
| amusiLgly charged 10 my DEBIT. Now, against this
gross. and patcnt absufdy, OF bringing this forty
thousand dolsrs into view, IN This way, | protest.
| cd of rou,se in The strongest terms contend