The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-06-23

in the Registers ofces book OF final results setlet
quarterly and balanced every year and then as to sucf
of the Register, presented by the committee differ only
because they exhibit from these books the different stages
of the redemption of the public debt These accounts
as follows
Stock book. Book o
receipts
Notes of Issues prior 1896 funded. S4Os5o SS6,2t
Notes Of issues under at Of July 22 os ooo ssa s
Notes of issues under of Jan. q,
| The committee speak much of the difference in these
items, especially in those relating TO the issues under the
acts of 1916 and lS47 But similar amounts were de
Quoted from both the debit and credit side OF the
treasury to the amount of one cent Neither did they a
feet the aggregate amount OF debt apparently due by the
government The only difference is, that by one account
more of the public debt would appear TO be in the form
treasury notes and less the form of stocks and by the
other the form OF stocks, and less in the form Of
treasury notes. but the debt of the government would be
| the same under both statements.
Neither do the statements of the notes funded Of
prior TO 1916, affect the aggregate amount OF debt
due by the government. The subsequent statement OF
the Register or of his clerks more correct than
the rs would only go to prove that from the aggregate
amount of stock issued under the act of January rs
ls47-namely, salts 300-the amount OF 800, $50 and
$0350 ought to have been deducted by the Register
for notes issued prior to 1916.
With this deduction made this item In table A OF the
Register would have stood as follows:
Ayais Of loan under act of January 2s lsi7 after de
Instead of as stated in table A 4,l34,95O 90
S4,loO 90
This is the only difference regards the result made
by taking the account OF notes funded by the Register
one of his tables from the stock kept in his office,
and in his subsequent statement or that OF his clerks,
from the book OF receipts and expenditures, also kept IN
his office but change is made by either statement in
the amount OF debt due by the government.
If, however, there were real difference between ia
BILE signed and certified by the Register under the law
TO the Secretary and subsequent statement of the Regis
by no one and never seen by the Secretay-low would
this constitute any charge OF error or discrepancy against
the Secretary,
1t is strange to observe the method which the commit
tee adopt with view to represent discrepancies in the
port of the Secretary OF the Treasury Referring to these
alleged discrepancies, they say:
'As the committee had data by which they could
certain from whence this sum was derived. application
made to the department., and they were informed that
the fourth item composed of the following sums"
The committee then give the sums which they thus
obtained and compare them with statement Of the Sec
rotary of the Treasury, or rather with of the Regis
ers tables, appended to his report, and then comment
crepancies the report of the Secretary of the Treasury
Now, all this is very extraordinary. The committee say
they made application to the department, and got this
information tits pretended that this committee made
any application for this any other information to the
Secretary of the Treasury. the Acting Secretary,
even apprzed either of them that such investigation
was pending but the application which they made for
information to clerks the Registers office, from
whom they get statement, unsigned and uncertifed
and them comparing that statement thus Obalned with
of the Registers tables appended to the report of
the Secretary, they represent the difference, alleged
by Them discrepancy in the report OF the Secretary
OF the Treasury, and seem to think that he ought
to have compared the table furnished by the Register
in December last to the Secretary, and accompanying
his report, with statement alleged to have been
furnished TO the committee several months afterwards by
clerks in the Registers Office and selected other
of these tables to be appended 10 his repohe latter
statement having been by the Secretary, and
never made prepared until several months after the
Secretary had communicated his report to Congress.
To show how little general results are affected by diff
feren modes OF stating accounts, we shall give SO much
of table relates to treasury notes and loans it
would be in gross. We shall then give as it pub
shed embracing certain particulars taken from the stock
book. Lastly, shall give it with certain particulars
taken from the book Of receipts and expenditures.
TABLE Atm gross)
Receipts
From treasury notes issued under act OF
July %, 1916 $7,437 500 90
From treasury notes issued under act of
January 2s, ls47 1871 $50 90
Loan under act of July 90, 1916 4,sSs,l49 as
Loan under act of January %, 1S47 4,l75 800 90
$2S,s72 1893 As
Expenditures