The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-12-21

charged with being defaulsr when The government was
largely indebted 10 hmj that his drafts were protested
causing great loss TO him personally and an increased
expense TO The government OF thousands OF dollars
isaye II 10 ibe country 10 decide whether have made
good my defence of Col Weller, and charges OF negec
col duty BY the administration
Mr. CASS, 80 Tar as respects the original issue in.
ynlved IN this case. am not 10 be driven from il al all
That was the only reason why undertook 10 say word
have had some experience as well as the senator from
ONO, IN matters OF public accounts, and struck
very strange reason that should be removed for
such delay az was said 10 have occurred in this
! was only on that account that undertook 70 inyesli
gale Inc acs Now with respect TO what has been said
today by the senator from Ohio have no remark to
make ! have full confidence in the capacity and Probty
sary removed but as said before. il the senator from
Ohio had put the Of his removal upon the ground
Of bis politics. and because he was democrat, and even
not have word TO say But il is precisely because the
senator does not put on that ground, but the ground
improper conduct on the part Of Col Weller. and OF
the instructions given him, that have spoken on the
subject The first reason given for his removal that
he failed to render his accounts in proper time The
says that he had the confidence OF the
administration, IL he had given that his reason first
would have acquiesced in the decision OF the admins
Iaon in removing him but he gives that he
did not render his accounts in must continue
show how illegal this transaction according to the
counts given Col. Weller did not reach Panama, his
first hatng place. unit, the I'd Of March, and he was re
moved on the 26th OF June Only small fraction OF the
first quarter had then EXPIRED and no administration dis
posed to conduct fairly towards an officer would remove
hm Tor failing 10 make return within such fraction,
even II the senator were right as be is not in his
sIuction OF the law. will read the provision upon this
subject
SEC Ind BE- it further enacted Thar every officer
agent oil the United States who shall receive public
WHICH he is NOT authorized retain, salary, pay,
etnolomen shall render his accounts quarter yearly the
proper accounting officers OF the treasury with the
necessary 70 the correct and prompt settlement thereof
within three month, least after the expiration Of each
successive quarter Ii resident within the United States
and within six months il resident foreign couniry Pro
v,dd That nothing herein contained shalt be
restrain the Secretaries OF ot the Departments
qurng such from any officer agent subject to the
control Of such Secretaries as the public interest may
quire
SEC Amd Be further enacted, That every officer OF
ys'ons 81 the preceding sections shall, by the officer
charged with the direction OF the Department. which
President Of United States and dismissed nom The pub
c service iropided That Ia all cases Where any officer,
III uetau as aforesaid snail account to the satisfaction oi
the President for such default, he may be continued in
Office anything ia the foregoing provision TO the contrary
Notwithstanding" EH4.E
We might fairly consider the first quarter as the first
full quarter including in il the fractions and the officer
10 have the whole of the quarter if in the United
States, and Of the quarter beyond that If in foreign
country, within which to forward his accounts to the
treasury. All this is clear and COL Weller was re.
moved before the expiration OF the first quarter itself
before actually the day OF paying the accounts had come
including the fractional quarter IN the rs before the
time required for the rendition OF the accounts by law
the portion OF the month is 10 be considered as full
quarter Such removal, for such an alleged reason
never took place before; trust it will take place
again.
Now what answer does the senator give to this view
OF the law and of the rights and duties Of the officer
Why. he says that the discretionary power given the
Secretary OF the department then Mr. Buchanan ex
ercised and that the term OF three months within which,
after the expiration OF the quarter, the to
be rendered, shortenedo what period he does not
say but suppose Just enough TO make Col Weller de-
isulter But sir, the senator is altogether in error
There Is such direction TO be found in Mr.. Buchanans
letter-nothing like it, MIR. Bucha nan, in the precise
terms OF the law, requires Col Weller 10 render his
counts quarterly But al what time these quarterly
accounts TO be rendered TO the treasury Certainly not
within the quarleror that must expire before the pay
ments can be legally made, and then time must be al
lowed 10 prepare and send the accounts and in many
cases, from the position OF public officers, much time
must elapse after the expiration OF the quarters before
even the menis be made, the OF the In
dian agents. whose sub.agens or interpreters may be
lar IN the interior, IN the case OF postmasers remote
stations, and OF other discussing officers under similar
circumstances And II was precisely for this reason
that the law allowed three months. after the expira
ton OF the quarter TO the officer make bis payments
prepare bis vouchers and for ward them 10 this term
shortened by Mr.. Buchanan Not a word OF it. lie
law. He says. render your accounts quanerly--by
quarterly subdivisions OF the year and 20 does. the
law. He might, indeed. have exercised a discretion,
there were Jas reason for it. But in this case he
should have said, you are not 10 have three months
after the expiration Of the quarter within which TO rem
or two MONTHS the fifty six days used in this case
All this. however uniusi6able, would have been plain
But what reason could be given for such OF power
do not know for doubt IL there is rsing officer
in the United States. Of Washington who il required
TO render his accounts at shorter period than three
months. Such cases they do exist must be very
am speaking OF vouchers and accounts of statements of
receipts and expenditures Now, here s officer almost
the other side OF the globe, in a and wild coun-
try and human imagination find for short.
ening his term for rendering accounts which would
Apply, and with tenfod force TO every other officer the
United Statesl II entered into the thought OF Mr.
Buchanan 10 do His instruction was correct and he
lett the Ofhcer the him by this
performance OF his duty Why, sir the senator says
this time shortened. Let ask him TO what time il
shortened By whatday had Colonel eer reason TO
suppose his accounts must be rendered! Mr. Buchanan
and the law say render them quarterly; and that is all
Mr. Buchanan says. Now, have already shown that
rendering accounts quarterly canaot that they must
be rendered within the quarter ITSELF for that is imposs
BILE. II must expire before the payments arcmade Then
Mr. Buchanan referring, as the first provision OF the
ments made and accounts rendered. and not TO the
time when these accounts shall be received AT the
ury That he left TO the law. II be did limit IT, call
upon the senator from Ohio TO show within what time
for without that there can be no limitation.
The law further requires that the removal shall take
place upon the report OF the proper officer of the treas
ury showing the neglect Was there any such reportl
hazard little in saying that no accounting officer OF
the treasury would have dared TO make such report 80
dismissed for not doing what the law had not required
him TO do and what still adds TO the injustice Of the
transaction is the fact that these very accounts arrived
with surprising prompude, the day after the removal
had taken places and II their previous reception had
been the true ground OF removal, that removal should
have been cancelled and restoration taken place under IN
power given 70 the President As case where full salts