The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1856-04-11


The extraordinary assault upon the Auditor Gen
al the Furnishing Telegraph OF the y 81 IS quite
unjust It's assertions are nntounded. Because,
torsooth, Mr.. BANRS with hve years experience IN
Office land himself lawyer of some pretension,'
happened 10 differ with colleague upon dctteaff
Dgint Of constructions, he IS be deprecated IN the
estimate or of the people, and has fellow public SER
vaut. the State Treasurer, exalted ON account OF Su
peTioT astueness Il is far from being proved that
Mr.. BANKS IN notwithstanding the decia-
NATION OF the Taegyapb, particularly as Mr. b. IS
backed, as we shall presently show, by what ought
o be good legal authority. Any reading The
number OF the same newspaper IN which the
Auditor General Is assBIled will observe III the
coutt report, that have Judge PEARSON on one
side; on thu other, the banks and able counsel, APP
p"aling to he Supreme Court-Nhch body may re-
all that The Judge below has DONE and TINS up
set the guess of the Ireasurer so Tar all the dec-
sious bul eFeSA (aS 10 ro"strnrfonl by all
the parties. This being the exact state of the case
the Iskegruph should, IN common taIrness-It faf'-
ness is to be expected from that qnarer-have wait
ed until culmiuation of decisions had proved the
Auditor General, and Attorney General, clearly and
positively 1rroRg. Most right-;hiBking people would
have chosen that course.
1t is shameless To charge the present Auditor with
neglect of duty since 1883, some fifteen years
before he came into office. The dtt0ih OF any de-
naitment Of the government, must necessarily be
managed by the clerks, while the errors are proper
y be charged the neglect of It's head. As wen
nigh. the Governor be expected 10 write ONT all his
commissions or the Treasurer balance IN person his
books every evening, no one expects this-no single
man could ever perform the clerical labor In refer
ence TO tbe accounts banks and other corporate
remaining unsettled il IS fault of the present
Auditor Grneral. The books IN his department show
this account 10 have been settled regularly up TO
November, SIS, when Governor RIrNER came INTO
oihce, at which time full settlements appeared 10
have ceased. When the present Auditor came into
Office Ia 1851 nearly iG years had elapsed, without
asetIemeut. He then applied for legislative author
ltv. which accorded after lapse OF several
years, IN 1880, 10 compel all corporations TO make an
nuaI reports 10 him aud settle their accounts. The
Legislature ordered special clerk for the business,
and it is now, after neglect OF mewhere nearly
twenty years, in efficient process OF complr'Ion.--
Thus proving The present Auditor to be entirely Elf
cent we'll prompt in the execution OF the pow
entrusted 10 him.
der Mr.. SLlrEr's view OF the case, the priuape he
is 50 lampooned for adhering to, must have been
yielded thus warning all the banks that it was TO
be applied them eventually, but withheld, as the
question OF magnitude, unite clear and
positive determnauon-a combined course OF action
should acIuate both branches OF the accounting
department, when ii would be enforced upon all.
H. all this matter beg to he understood, that
50 far as we concerted we do not care about the
banks or their privilege. The object III view j, To
do Justice TO an honest and upright public servant
whose conduct in this question h> been endoI sed
aud sustained by the highest legal adviser of the
State ln the following opinion:
LANCASTER, July 10, 1853.
ton. Z. Baaks, An@itor General.
DEAR SIR: | have received Mr. Bailey's letter OF
l7th inst. requesting me to communicate 10 YOU my
opinion the question whether the Sth section OF
the OF 18th March, 1919, (pamph p. 1879 repeas
the 18th section OF the extending the charter OF
the Farmers and Mechanics Bank of Philadelphia
passed 10Th March, 1919. have carefully exami-
ned The point presented by This question which is
curious and peculiar one. and 10y free from
difficulty. am nnder the impression that you di-
rected attention 10 This question upon former
occasion, ia 1851, and that then gave yon ia>ty
expression Of ny views upon it, which have been
confirmed by subsequent deliberations
\ comparison OF the two sections referred 10, eX-
hjbi1s curious feature in oar legislation. II is OBJ
tina, that which is Po>tefor in DATE, must have
first passed through both houses OF the Legislature
and that the Sfh section OF the other art intended
10 repeal and introduce in lis stead the scale OF
taxation the 7th section OF that act hut
this intention seems TO have been accidentally de-
featei, ny he omission Of the Governor sign the
bank charter until tie next day after the other
was passed. ara Of opinion that as the act OF 10Th
March, 1919, i po>teror in date, il would, far
from beng repealed by the former, repeal any part
Of the former act wbichrwas inconsistent with its
provisions. Both The sections referred 10 have been
superseded, far regards bank, incorporated
der he general bank OF 10th April, 1850, by the
2lal section Of that ect.
Very respectfully, Yours. &c.
(S.-Ged) fI0Ss +. FRANKLIN.