Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1858-09-11
Burton,s Bond.

From evidence developed in the course Of the /
Committees Investigations, We we're induced to be
leve that the Bond required by the Act Of January
%, 1886 had been executed BY Dr.. BURTON and de-
posted in the Secretary Of States Office. This
opinion was based upon Governor JoHSsOS's state
ment in his letter to the Committee in which be said
that his recollection Of the matter that the bond
had been executed From his general accuracy as
= business man We were compelled to believe the'
Gov. gs recollection correct, and this eoneiu-
sion was strengthened by Dr. BUETOEs positive de-
clarstion that he had given the bond The Com
mittee. however, in their report have arrived at
different conclusion, but by what process Of reason
ing we cannot clearly understand. The only evil
denoe set forth in the report to sustain their Opin~
ion are the facts that the bond could not be found
and that it. was not registered, required by law,
in the Office Of the Secretary Of State. Now, the
fact that the bond could be found stronger
evidence thati never xisted thanthe disappearance
Of the bonds reported having been stolen by
Messy, was, that those bonds never existed. The
feet that the bond was not registered only shows
that BURTox failed do his duty in Ibis in many
other particulars Gov JoHNsONs statement and
BURrox's declaration establish the fact that the
bond was executed and its disappearance isas easily
accounted for, as the disappearance Of The $40 0OO
which BURTON embezzled He certainly had 8
sufficient motive to destroy the bond, and man
who had proved to be unfailhful in the custody Of
money entrusted his keeping wOnd hesitate 10
remove or destroy bond which his interest requir-
ed should be destroyed. We are compelled by these
considerations dissent from the opinion expressed
by the Committee that the Governor failed to take
the bond" The evidence is clearly, and we think,
exclusively the other way.
The report is also erroneous in another partieu-
la-. The Committee state that;
can act passed January 25, 1856, makes it the
duty of the Governor 10 require the Secretary OF
State before he enters upon the discharge OF his du-
ties as Commissioner Of Internal improvements, to
execute bond, with good and sufficient security,
in the sum Of $50 600, conditioned to account for
and pay over all moneys as provided for in said act
The Language of the Act referred 20 is,
''That the Secretary Of State, before he enters
upon the discharge Of the duties imposed upon him
according tothe provision of this Act shall first ex
ecute bond with good and sufficient security TO the
Governor of the State, in the sum Of twenty thou
sand dollars, conditioned to account faithfully fol-
all moneys, which may come to his hands and pay
over the same as provided for in this act"
The law does not make il the duty Of the Govern.
or to require the bond to be given, but it makes il
the duty Of the Secretary of State to execute the
bond to the Governor Asimilar law required the
sheriffs, to give bOLds payable to the Governor
Both of these laws have been repealed by subse
quent Act requiring all bonds to be made payable t.
the State of Tennessee. The Governor has no more
to do with the execution of the Secretary of Stat
Bond than he has with the execution of Sherifs
Bonds. 1t is made the duty Of sll these officers Il
make bonds payable to the State Il has never beer
considered the duty of the Governor to see that eve
~ Sheri's Bond has been properly executed yet b,
is required TO do no more in the case of the Score
tsry's Bond than the Sherif7s.
Governor JOHNSON, however, in pursuance Of tn,
general requirement that the Governor shall see thai
all laws are faithfully executed did, with his usua
scrupulous exacness in the discharge of his duties
cause this bond to be given by DR.. BURTON. He is
in sense subjeottO censure but merits the approx
al of the entire State for his fidelity in this matter