Arkansas intelligencer., 1844-09-28

| OI
satives, and of the Bank Committee of 1888, when
Inc facts were reported by the President M the
bank, as above stated. He wns aIsoa member
IN lSaO. AT neither session did he utter a word
upon the subject, or propose an enquiry. But, in
1872, when Col. Sewers term of service in the
UnIted States Senate was about to expire, and
new election was about TO take place, the word Of
| complaint was heard. g.
The two Houses having already agreed 10 90
INTO the election for Senator, on Friday, the ith
November, DIR. Gibson, the Representative from
not oplng county, aud at present, candidate for
Dovernor' on the 9th, two days before the election
was 10 take place, proposed a resolution of maui.
ry, into sale of Bonds, made for the State
Bank, by Messrs. Sewer and Fulton. He made
speech upon offering the Resolution, and dealt
10 very harsh and serious charges against the
commissioners, and particularly against Sewer
The House, by vote of 81 to l, gratified him,
by adopting his resolutions. Tho election for
Senator was postponed until the 3d. q committee
was raised by ballot, (the mover Of the resolution,
himself, being one of the cornmlttee;) but their
investigation, so far from sustaining the charges
which Or. Gibson had made, resulted in an 0n-
quaiihed acquit.a of Messrs. Sewer and Fulton.
OF all blame and censure. The Report was adopt.
ed by vote of 81 to 6; and the gentleman did not
pretend to make n counter Report.
On the llth, DR.. Gibson offered a resolution
10Y way OF amendment TO series of resolutions
winch had been offered by Mr.. Field, of HEMP.
s1ead, IN relation to the Real Estate Bank) by
wnIcn ne proposed an enquiry into the sale of the
ooo Bonds already referred to, and required the
committee to report before the election for Sena.
TOR should take place. Ii is evident, that it was
inc oes'gn' that these investigations should oper-
ate upon, and afec4 the Senatorial election. Now
mark the RESULT THAT relating to the Bonds Of
the State Bank has been told. On the 22d, after
having had the subject under consideration for
eiecen days, with the books and records of the
oahk open to Inspection and the officers of the
bank, as we'll as Messrs. Sewer and Williamson.
present. ready to aid them, and afford them every
Possioe Information which might be required, the
non. Ddcsd Walker, a member of the committee
on Inc part OF the Senate, and the Hon. John Field
chairman on the part Of the House of Represen.
tatves rose up in their respective places. and stat,
ed, as If by authority. to their RESPECTIVE Houses
that nofhing had been eiicied in the Investigation
n"ten co"a or SHOULD affect the result ofthe Sena.
toridl eecti0n." DIR. Gibson was IN his seat in
the Rouse at the time. the other members who
s'sheo the subsequent Report, were in their pla.
ces' ana yet they said not a word. Their silence
was an endorsement of the statements made by
Messrs Walker and Field. These statements
were made that the election might be no longer de-
s ssrrea' ana !. was Immediately brought on Col;
votes given; and among others, the votes of Messrs
w afker, F,'l Baile,. Jas. F. Gaines, Elan.
agin and Arringion-slX Of the nine members of
the committee who subsequently, made the second
Report.
The question naturally present ITSELF was the
verbal Report, made by Walker and Field. and
which received the silent sanction OF the other
members OF the committee, true! Did not the
committee have the time, the opportunity and the
to- -. T.
was not the committee wanting in the discharge of
their duties to their constituents? Did thew not
suffer fraud to be perpe.rated upon the people of
the State. in not performing their duties and in
permitting the election of Col. Sewer? What ex.:
cuse can be made for the six members of the com.
mittee, whose duty it was to ascertain and report
the facts, and who, after eleven DAYS investiga-
ton, made the Report, which they did. and then
voted for Col. Sewer! If The Report was true,
how does 1t compare with the second Report? Is
not the one or the other most evidently false?--
Which is it? If tho first, were not the members
who took the lead in instituting and prosecuting
the investigation, for the purposes which prompts,
ed it. guilty Of dereiction Of duty, and fraud
upon the people? If the second be true, in tho
charges made against Col. Sewer, direct as well
as by inference and nuendo, SO far from being
worthy to represent Arkansas in tho United States
Senate, IS he not unworthy to associate, as the
equai, win honest men! These questions are
propounded for the consideration of fair minded
mon, with the conviction OF the response such
men must make.
As have already said, the committee had all
the means, and every opportunity of nscertaining
the truth. They had eleuen days and migh, have
had longer time, had they desired it, the mode
and manner Of the sale and conversion Of the
funds into S.ulhern and Western paper, had been
reported to the Legislature in 1898; the books
and records of the Bank were open to inspection;
the clerk Of the bunk was ready and willing to
a1ord then, every possible facility, and Messrs.
Sewer and Williamson were then in the city of
Little Rock, ready to give any information which
might have been desired Of them we'll as to
make every necessary explanation. Lot these
facts be borne in mind. ..r......
After the election for Senator, had transpired
all supposed that nothing more would be heard of
this subject. The motive and object which prompt
ed the investigation no longer existed Then why
was it further pursued The answer is obvious.
The House, by sustaining the Report made upon
the State Bank Bonds, had virtually declared to DR..
Gibson, that he had "borne false wiiness agains.
his neighbor." In regard TO The Real Estate Bank
Bonds, he had been more cautious. and had made
no direct charge; but charges were made BY inpli-
cation. 10 the understa nding Of all. The two sub.
iects we're Justly regarded as twin brothers nd