Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1830-08-13
THE ANSWER OF MILES KING,
To the Reply ofthe Fourth .Auditor.
CONTINUED

come to the old charges relating to my con
duct in my subsequent attempts to settle my
accounts with the Department And the frs,
OF these, was the insinuuon of the honorable Secre
tary, that had reproduced" he termed it, an &C
count for clerk hire, &c. which had been formerly
alloweuto me, with tho items considerably increased
IN amount in answer to which. I simply stated the
reasons which had led me to advance nv claims for
additional allowances on these items, and which
more particularly remarked, had submitted to the Sc
cretary himself, on laying tho before hm(as
the account itself since published III the Documents,
a. p. 80, conGrms.l The point then that was con
eider,ng. was not exactly whether my new charges
for these things ought to have been allowed, but on
iy whether there any ground for the unworthy
reelection that had been cast upon me for bringing
them fnrward though to be sure, did incidentally
show that they were altogether reasonable and just.
Now. our Auditor, in defending his friend here,
chooses to forget the point of the controversy al
together, ION which he admits OF course, that this
honorable colleague was inexcusabe) and goes of
to argue, at greai leny h, that the claims ought not
to BIO allowed. This however, is another question
which intended to have argued my side, when
the case comes on In the time satisfied to
rest upon what have already said concerngl may
aud however, IN answer to his statements about
these extras, that he quite accurate saying,
that Il generally gave my principal clerk not more
than $500 and when I employed an extra clerk,
whcn was nut seldom paid HIM at the rate OF 400.
fhe fact 's that Tor several years paid my prnci-
pal clerk 5 1000 and my second one $500 besides
employing extra ones occasionally, and pa ring Them
OF course, for their services. AT the time,
Tor two years, and afterwards used tenement of
my own which had been and might still have been.
rented out for $500 year. Yet for clerk hire, Of
flee rent, and other extras have, as vet received
other allowance but that of s. 235 from the year
1916 to the year 1920. (5eng about $500 year and
$1,000 year since has period, together with
$500 ADDITIONAL from the wear 1898; whilst the agents
for Boston, Philadelphia & New York as our Auditor
admits ha all been allowed 81 600 year from The
year 1877, and he Agent for N York an additional
sum OF $500 year rom I825, for The same ,h'ngs
although the business of any one OF their Agencies
rarely equaed, and has usually fallen far short of
that of mine But there, them any jus ground
of discrimination against mei And If the order
whichil have quoted applied TO them only in its terms
Is 1t not clear that II embraced also spirit:
And lid my being Ignorant OF that order, or my neg
lectng 10 claim the benefit of 1t al the proper
time bar me from doing later period, when
altered circumstances had made it both neces
sary and proper that | should insist upon ali
my rlghts' Then, as what Auditor SAYS
that the n lowance Of these extras is not found
ed immediately on law, but depends entirely on the
discretion or The Secretary, competent Judge
has decided as he reports himself that the Secretary
has the dis, ion under the lazy; and all will agree
that he should exercise It fair and impartial ma n
ner Mr. could the mere ccident of the Depart
ments having passed into hands, at all affect nv
right, n justice, 10 have the actual incumbent ey-
ercse 1t IN that manner IN my case. For the rest, il
our Auditor is right in saying that 'the original OBJ
jcct OF this allowance was to actual office ey.
penses, shall be able to show that the allowances
to me for these things. hava not Accommodated that
object And, on the other hand if he was rioht in
saying, IN his former Report already quoted, that
domestic Agents have been allowed round sums fr
contingent expenses. without being required to pro
doce vouchers, with he evident intent of swelling
their emoluments beyond ,Oo0.' (Duc p e65) so us
to give them compensation, in that way. for actual
services otherwise inaaequately rewarded I could
easily shew tina. my claim to these additional allow
ances IS still more just; for my ficia disbursements
have usually BEEN upwards $500 600 a year; and
my salary only $4,000 or hardy 3-s per cent on the
Iaid Syh. moSt
clent Compensation for the trouble and responsibility
or the service and hardly consistent indeed will the
sPr1t at least of the law itself which seems have
considered on" per cent or thereabouts proper
far B3' enough on this point for the present
Ihe mex charge. IN mis- par oil the case was one O.
our Auditor S own manufacture, though srme hing IL
the style OF his honorable friend being gross insin
uaiion that had q tempted to get my claims for Ger
tam items my account, amounting to a. $50 ca
vouchers No. III to ~ inclusive J allowed me sec
ond time, some years after they had been first pasae
TO my credit, TO which my answer that IL be
lieved myself hat these CLAIMS had been allowed ant
had certainly no thought Of preferring them over a
gam; but was told at the Auditors Office, in Sep
TIMBER last. that they had been found passed :,
my credit-5ut were still suspended and that there
foe, must send up the vouchers to SUPPORT them
upon which forwarded the dupllcat 8 (having pre-
sented he originals before with view a. STA ed
ito lei the Office rectify its supposed omission funo,
further examna ion should b. appa rent that it was
one;" and added that had "a list of these sun
posed to be suspended. but really allowed, items
from the Auditors office, Ito verify any statement
on the point Now Auditor repeats this silIv
charge and attempts support it, in his proper style
by string of bubbles. Thus, he Denies particujar
ly that any such lls furnished me by HIM
or by any one else IN his off e. and insist upon IT
as matter OF great consequence, that 1t was never
handed to me- las it | used that expression
in relation to t) Yer, he admits after all, thai NAV
have something like it, only he is quite sure tina
wrote myself His words I'm Sept $780, while
I in Kentucky, he called at the Office, as | am
informed and desired to examine bis old accounts.
The Clerk having charge of the papers aided hin
in the examination dissection Of his returns. be-
ing descriptive list Of each voucher with notes
showing him when they were rejected or suspended
was shewn to him; and from that, with the aid Of
the clerk h. made ont list of appended vouchers.
Now whether | made out the list with the aid of
the clerk the clerk made it out for me- is evi
IDENTIFY a matter Of no sort of moment except so far
as the strict accuracy Of my statement is concerned