The Weekly register., 1843-08-26
ost respectfully,
Your ob't. serv't,
JAMES Z. MATTHEW VS..

The explanation above given by Mr..
Matthews, is 10 our mind any thing but
satisfactory. If, as is stated above, the
law ''failed TO give the Auditor power TO
audit such accounts" why were they au-
dited by him; and by what right did he
make any deduction from the prin+er's
charges? 1.-THE circumstances required
the "compromise" spoken of, what right
had he to make it, if the law, as he as
serts, gave him no power over the sub
ject matter? In deducting from the
printers fees, he ha s,by his own show
ing, assumed to exercise power which
the law withheld And what is the ex-
cuse assigned for it? Why, lorsooth.
the circumstances required him upon
his Gown responsibility to adopt a sys-
tenn Of compromise" We do not think
upon the ground Of sticking to the e4etter
of the law, which he seems noa0 TO think
incumbent upon him, that he was ae
thorized to adopt this ''system of com
promise" at alI But now he has adopt
ed it, ought he not TO carry it out in
good faith, so as to protect tie rights of
all parties interested? Having assumed
power which the law does not give,
ought he now to shrink from that s'reS-
/ possibility" which he has taken, and
throw all the risk upon the shoulders Of
the tax payer, with the penalty q six
teen per centum to back il? If he does
not think the excess of the printers
charge over what he has allowed should
in fairness be paid why in short does he
| require payment and throw the burden
on the tax payer Of getting the msney
back as best he can?
His answer to this is that it is the pro-
vince OF the Legislature 10 determine the
matter, and that he must hold the money
for the indemnity Of the State until the
Legislature shall in mercy disgorge it.
Why then did he not call TIE attention
Of the East session of the Legislature 10
this subject! Was it SO unimportant
that the little wolf bills must have the
preference? To take two or three, or
! five or ten dollars out Of the pocket of
each tax payer on redeeming his lands,
make him pay sixteen per cent on that,
and then after year or two, &C or send
10 jackson to get worthless State war
rant in return, is certainly no trifie 10
him, however it may be considered by
| Mr.. Matthews.
If he intended to take the ground he
! has here assumed before the last session
/ Of the Legislature, he must have known
it, and is clearly culpable for not calling
the attention Of that body to the subject;
and that he did know it is manifest from
the fact that the transaction for which
we have called him 10 account took
| place about the 28th Of June last.
In stating that the overcharge alluded
70 was "some seven dollars we were in
error. 1t was about 50 SO besides in
terest-that being the amount deducted
from the printers bill.
r The following is the account to which
we allude, as we find it receipted by the
! Auditor, the land having been redeem
ed by ]. c. Armstrong, Esq. Of this
place.
John w. Lane in account with the State
Of Mississippi
For the amount of State tax on
Ne or of sec. So, T. 6,R7,
West, in Ponola county, for
1842, 80
For Printers fees, advising sale
of sam me, 7 so
For execution of deed to the same
by tax collector, 5 90
For tax collectors commissions
at 4 per cent. on State and co.
tax and printers fee, to wit:
$i3 10 65s
For interest at l6 per ct per an.
on 10 954, the above sums
together 81 months AS
For county tax on said land for
1912, as per return, 90
Interest on same at 16 per cent,
| 81 months, IA
f9 84s
Received payment of the ahora 90