Martinsburg gazette. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1833-1855, 1839-01-16


j The gentleman from Maryland says
that no party in particular is to blame
for these defalcations, because defalca-
tons have happened under oil parties. -
VIII the gentleman be SO good as TO toll
US what party was to blame in the case OF
the receiver, LiDn7 That man was gull
ty of malversuiion the Secretary knew
il, and threatened him, then renominaled
him for new appointment. He was
confirmed and, again proving in default,
was warned again, and again, AND again,
and after oil, continued in Office till he
finally fell into the slough of defalcation
Was no party to blame for this J Or is il,
the v,llanous Wings that are to blame
for thus rewarding a public depredator I
The gentleman, however, says that some
deiaulters have been Wings and some
Locofocos they have been men of all
parties. | answer, not under this admin
istralon. ask the gentleman 10 point
out one. II has been said that Swartwou.
was a conservative. BE that as il may,
he was one of the greatest Of oil General
Jackson's iavortes--he was his open, &C.
tve, clamorous advocate---and did more
to effect his election TO the presidency
than any other man in the State Of New
York, if not in the United States; and he
was rewarded Tor it to his hearts content.
Sir, the gentleman cannot show us a SOL
itary Wing among all the deiaulting re-
ceivers at the Western Land offices.
will show the gentleman, if he will print
this document, where one oil the dciaulters
gives it openly to the Secretary as his ex.
cuse for not paying over a large amount
of public money in his hands, that his de-
mocratic friends advised him not to leave
the ground till after the presidential cleo
ton which brought MIR. Van Buren, into
power. But, admitting that they were
Wings, every one Of them, does that JUS.
THY or excuse the Secretary Of the Trea-
sury in continuing men in Office who. as
he well knew, were divertng the public
money 10 their own use +? shaving with il,
specializing on it and in re-nominoting
them to office while still dclaullers Ia
permitting one o bis perambulatng a
gents to advise him TO retain thiefin Of
icc, because his lands were now full and
he would steal no more, whereas new
hand would only follow his example r.
And is il to be an excuse for the theits Of
one party 10 say, Well, you stole TOO 7"
| do not know one Wing IN all this docu.
mcnt of defalcation but if there were an
hundred, is this an argument TO be used
here Is this the salt that is to cure the
corruptions Of the administra men ?---
The charge is, that the party picked on,
these men, appointed them TO office, and
held them in office while they were pick
ing and stealing, /" until their hands were
full :" and what is the answer? +" You
pick and steal, too" How many Wings
they may have bought up by the hopes OF
such golden opportunities, cannot say
perhaps many. But | put it to the honor
and the integrity Of the proud and honor
able gentleman from Maryland, man
who would disdain to become defaulter
himself, TO say whether this is a fit argu-
ment for him to put forth in defence oil
such an officer as Mr.. Woodbury. Sir,
il is the strongest Of ali demonstrations of
Of the state Of morals to which the party
is reduced. For myself despise Wing |
thief as heartily as any other.
Mr.. TnoMas hGse interposed. am
sure the honorable gentleman from Vir-
ginia does not intend wifuly to msrepre-
sent; but he has now certainly put me in |
n false position. ] said that men Of all |
political parties, and under every success
sive administration, had been found public |
dcfaulters; and some Of them under the
administ' alton Of the venerable gentleman
behind me, (Mr. Adams.)
Mr.. WISE. understandable gentleman
position perfectly il is, that delaulters
have not belonged to one party alone.
WE'LL sir; what does that argument a.
mount 10? Analyze il, and il comes 10
precisely what say. The charge on
his party ant on his Secretary is, that
they knew of these enormous defalca-
tions, and connved at them; and the an
swer TO that is, there always have
been delauters, Of all pariies." Can
gentleman Of integrity rely on such a dc.
fence? The true answer would be, "your
parties and your Secretaries knew as well
as we, and they connived at defalcations
Just as we have DONE" That would be
an answer. But can it be said is il true 7
will the gentleman say il do not, in my
call, go back an inch beyond 1884, and
show that defalcations were not only
multiplied and enormous. but that they
were tolerated and connived at. Now
let the gentleman show us any other Sec
rotary of the Treasury, from Washing
tons DAYS, who did the like. Lct him pro-
duce US a Secretary who ever before re-
ported that he knew Of cases, by ffties
and by hundreds, whore bis subordinates
were taitliless and corrupt, and yet that