Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1858-05-27

have returned so large an amount of not 9
without taking up my bonds 1t is, however.
unfortunate for me that Col. Luttrell's recol-
lection is indistinct on this point. He, how
ever, states that he gave me $4,000 OF, new
issues and returned me about the same amount
in the issues gave him. Does not this ac-
count for the l01 bonds of $1,000 each, re-
ported in my July statement?
/ asked Mr.. Morton if he did not go to the
box Of the Exchange Bank and take out Al
bonds of $1,000 each. in the absence of the
Comptroller, on an order had given him for
that amount? He replied in the negative.
Col Luttrell states that Mr.. Morton showed
him the order, but that he did not give him
the bonds then, and has no recollection of
ever giving them to him since. The order l
gave Mr.. Morton is still in his possession.
Col. Luttreli knew this order was given him
for the bonds.
1t was his authority for giving Morton that
amount of bonds, whenever he returned a
corresponding amount of circulation. He did
not have the circulation when he exhibited
the order and as Morton subsequently told
me he needed the bonds for some purpose and
took them. as the Comptroller was absent
This Mr.. Morton denies
1t lis not certain if Col. Luttrell was present
when he got the bonds, that the order would
have been presented and given the Comptroller
But Mr. Morton says: "Col. Luttrell and my
self came together. and he did not think 1t
worth while to give up the order" Col. Lut-
trell does not sustain him in this statement.
Why not give up the order If had been
present should most certainly have called
for it, and not have left an order for SAL 900
bonds outstanding against me; and Mr.. Nor
ton would have presented the order, had Col.
Luttrell been present as authority to get the
bonds, The story is improbable, and but for
an anxiety to show that no one ever had ac-
cess to the bonds but the Comptroller, and
no officer of the Bank regarded any one but
but the Comptroller as the legal custodian OF
the bonds he would doubtless have admitted to
others, as he has done to me, that he did take
the bonds, without calling upon the Comptrol-
Ter for them as he had my order for them.
Every note now in circulation is prinad facic
evidence that bond is on deposit for the Sc
curity of that note The public must judge
what has become of the securities l deposited.
The Cashier of the Bank of Tennessee enters
the field early to show that had committed
fraud. The committee had hardly time to
give any attention to the matter, before we
find Mr.. Morton at the Committee room with
pencil and paper figuring out fully and COM
pletely the whole matter.
l have no fears as to how public opinion
will settle it. l shall rely OF testimony of
witnesses.
But must express my surprise at the ad
roitness with which the issue is attempted to
be made between the Bank of Tennessee and
myself The law requires the banker to de-
posite his bonds with the Comptroller, and it
should follow that a controversy about the
bonds should be between the Bank of Ten
nessee, where they are required to be deposit
ed. and himself, the Comptroller, or between
t. c banker and Comptroller. w. SPENCE.
may 26, 1858.