Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1830-06-08

al 10 the enclosed vouchers, was placed upon them a.
the time Of their date, and IL not, when, and
under what circumstances you approved them!' In
his reply, dated LIST February, 1880 he said have
to state, that the accounts approved by me abou,
six weeks since; but not before satisfied myself of
their That one Of the articles CHI
Was furnished, he personally knew; but in relation TO
the other two accounts he "The second account
Of T. b. Seymour, Tor sci. for wood furnished the Co...
selaton, as well as the SO 10 for water. paid C. Col
ley have no other reason to suppose correct, than
their certificates and Nfr. Kings word which cannot
douh. The certificates alluded TO, bear date Februa-
LIST, 1880, the day which his me was dat
ed VI course, he had evidence OF the CORE
oil the charges when he approved tho bls, about sir
treeks before except the word of Mr.. King l cannot
soneede, that this was the check which the Navy
Regulations contemplated that such approval
legal proper. that ought TO be tolerated by the
Department. See A Ii.
The vouchers numbered from (s) ts (Is) inclusive.
we're rejected; because, from their age the pre- sump-
ton 10, that they have been paid. that they ought
not to be- and because they destitute Of all the evil
dences OF authenticity aud correctness. necessary to
make them good vouchers in this office. Some Of them
have not the commanding officers approval or the
val sorekeepers receipt any receipt whatever, and
some are destitute Of all three.
The vouchers numbered from l9) to (44,) were re.
ec'ed Tor similar reasons, and for the further reason
that all those bearing date i'm 1916, 1877, 1915 1919
and 1920 were executed in the year 1929 On looking
at them, IL obvious that they lately written
On inquiry, was Informed they in the hand writ
ing Of Mr.. Joseph Murden, who had been i'm Mr.
Kings employment as Clerk, less than three years.
enclosed some Of them TO Mr.. Murden and inquired of
him, whether this whole class of vouchers was not
written in 1929? In reply, under date Of February
18Th, 1880 he said, found in the office of the late
Navy Agent anumber Of formal bills many of which,
upon examination, found had not been charged; these
put i'm proper form, and obtained signatures to- cores
poDding wi h the receipts of the informal ones &
ID. f.
sent an extract Of this letter TO Mr. King, and re-
quested the production Of these informal bills" with
their corresponding receipts. He called my office
and left parcel Of old papers, copies OF which will be
found on the right Of vouchers, No U9) 10 (i4) each
one being placed opposite the hill bills, which have
been made ont OF it, How far the manufacture OF 1922
corresponds with the material, the eader NAV
see at glance. A few Of These correspondence are
here exhibited.
Extracted from original bill of 1854 SO.
Navy Department
To Joseph L,visr, DR..
MAKING q pillar cases isl.2
S42
Received Of Miles King Navy Agen, a, Norfolk. the
sum oil nine hundred and htyfour dollars and eighty
seven cents, in payment OF the above
n,,, Ri JOSEPH LAWYER
Navy Department for the Navy Hospital
1919. To joseph Laver Dr.
august ''"' '' q q i pillow case. aa dollars
NoRFoLK, august 1919.
Received Of Miles King, Navy Agent, forty-two
dollars in payment OF the above hill,
Here three items are taken out OF an old bill, and
thrown into two, 10 make one receipt il for
1854 ST. AMI the other for Sl2 and the date is altered
almost two years.
ErtrHefed from an original bill Of S2,257 o5.
Miles King
1917 Bought Of r. f. Stead
Dec. 4. &c tbls. mess beef. at SlB 600 90
80 bbs. prime pork % 40 SI4 ~
$l,504 II
No receipt.
.Ne,c Bill
Navy Department for public stores,
lSlI. To r. +. Steed, DR..
Dec. l3 To As bbls. mess beef 600 90
81 prime pork Sl4 ~