The Arkansas banner., 1844-12-25

dctef ana HOHOf Ol duy lnulEluudls 0ould have been more entirely unsupported by single circumstance of justification, or could have more sgnally failed in its object, than this has done.
 A. RUST,
 A. G. WAIVERS,
 J. F. GAINES.
 concur in the above report as to all the facts, but avoid the expression of any opfn- ion as to their tendency.
 A. W. ARLINGTON. Mr. Gaines, whose name l have read as one of the signers, is also a signer of the other report and now an honorable member of the other House
 Mr. Gaines is a most veracious gentleman, entitled to the fullest faith and credit from this House, and l only ask, without making any comment, that you will take the two an- tipodal reports, compare them and judge o- the position of the gentleman for yourselves. That report embodies euerg fact the ma- jority set forth.
 The conversion of the funds,-the en- l ployment of Corcoran,-the retension of the Sl4,300 by Sevier, and every other item which has been made the subject of accusa- ton against Sevier from that time to the pres ent The act between the Commissioners and the Bank, is referred to, and of course had been in possession of and examined by the Committee.
 In relation to the retention of the S14,300 by Col. Sevier, might say he settled with the Central Board for whom he was acting. from whom he derived his authority, and to whom alone he was responsible, to the en- tire satisfaction of that Board, and there let the matter rest. But am willing to place t upon other grounds. Col. Sevier was not only the agent of the Bank, but Stockhol- der in it. The Central Board reposing full confidence in his fidelity and integrity, en- trusted him with the sale of l,500 of the State Bonds; and with the custody of the money after they were sold. He then, upon complying with certain regulations of the central board was entitled to $l5,000 of this money. This was to execute his note (having mortgaged the requisite amount of land) to the Bank, with good and approved security. Having done this, he was entitled to, and the Bank had no right to withold from him S15,000. IL did not depend upon their pleasure or caprice, for he could have demanded and coerced it. So far then from being guilty of breach of trust, the only stretch of authority was in assuming that the Bank would trust him few days to ex- ecute his note. This done, his right to the money was entire and perfect. Having been trusted with $l,500,000, was 1t presuming too far upon their confidence 10 suppose that they would trust him to comply with a mere form of the Central Board, being in his m al tbo shown by Newton's testimony, more than the Bank required.
 Next in order comes the charge that the compensation paid Sevier was exorbtant, and more than adequate to the services he rendered the Bank. And here permit me to remark, that the S2,000 he received was not as appears from the majority report, and as the gentleman rom Clarke would lead this house to believe, for selling 800, but l,500 bonds, as again appears from Mr. Newton's testi- mony, The attempt by that gentleman to lead thlS House into error upon question eflectlng person whom he was sitting in judgment upon was, though that person was apoltlcal opponent, what l was sorry to see, and something of which did not think him capable. Col. Ashley, Newton, and every witness sworn in relation to tbis point. con cur Tn stating the compensation allowed by the Central Board 10 Col. Sevier that so far from N2,00O being excessive. was entirely insufficient for the labor and the responsibii- fly which the agency imposed upon him.
 The employment of Corcoran, though sneeFed at by the majority committee, was proven by Col. Ashley, us well as the cir eumstances attending the negotiation, to have been indispensable to its favorable termina- lion.
 Aud lastly sir, letus notice that most amia- 6ie aud charitable inslnualion contained in short paragraph near the conclusion of lhe Report in which they say: (hasing promised that Lee and Corcoran had speeulaied upon Ihe hank m etlecIIng the exchanges, as there Was deFelopemeni of the remuneration they received for their lahorl: "llow far the Commissioners participated ia the emoIu- tbthts ut this speculation, we leave la be determined hy lhis House and an intelligent peapIen
 hF eeFcomn's evidence proves lIiaI Inc account rendered hy himself ie Wessrs. Sc siet and Williamson, aud by them la tho IsiiA, which va. appeadel lo Jbe majority heiefh is cerftr. ags! ;sg, s,.sa sfl., U, gi.s He8s9s purchased iul ,hc Cnmmlssloaegs. aHd ei ihe mtrs ai which be lail lee lJ.
 lss comparing Ihe receipt as naeses ta ! ta4 sssis,, wiil iAss account, yua isud sis. ao dseWpenrS whalevce hut nfg8agt aagea- Hisai atid coincidence, each itsia H the Fg- ee4nl eeHfe1mlHg siFiclly la las rnatzn1nd= laz as.e sa sas aeenuut
 #HH #sFa5H #a