Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1859-05-14


Gel. A. n. Crozier and she Hank of East
Tennessee
The Bsnssr lately copied from the Knoxville Wig
statement which charged substantially that rev.
enue collectors had paid money into the Bank Of
East Tennessee, by Mr. oRoz1ERs direction, he being
Comptroller, and that such revenue had never
reached the treasury-the Bank Of East Tennessee
claiming that they had paid It to the Traders
Bank, then owned by Mr. CRozIER and the latter
denying that they had ever received it."
In reply to this charge, Mr.. CRozIRR has written
the annexed letter to the editors of the Banner We
have no doubt that all candid men will agree with
the Banner that Mr.. eRozIEK exculpatss himself
from al censure." There does act appear to have
been the slightest ground for the charge:
NASHVILLE, May IL, '59.
To the Editor Of the Banner: The article in your pa
per of yesterday, copied from the Knoxville Wing,
relative ID the selection Of the Bank Of East Ten
nessee agent TO receive the State revenue, makes
it necessary that 1 should briefly state the facts
There is difficulty about any OF the revenue ex-
cept that paid subsequent to the passage of reso
luton Of the Legislature Of 1884, directing dis
bursting officers Of the State to deposit in the Union
Planters, State Banks After the passage Of this
resolution, | notified tae Bank Of Tennessee Of the
of Tennessee saw proper ID make some other
arrangement, would, as Comp troller, direct the
State revenue ID be deposited Ia tae Union
Bank. The Bank paid sn agent, Dibrell, to 90
With me to Knoxville in July, 1854. In Ju-
ly 1855, the branch Of the Bank Of Tennessee
al Athens sent an agent to Knoxville to receive the
revenue. Subsequently t. this / was informed by
the Bank of Tennessee that an arrangement had
been made with the Bank Of East tennessee to re-
ceve that revenue; knowing that letter had bee
written By the cashier OF the State Bank to the
Bank of lst Tennessee, directing the latter to re-
ceise the revenue, applied through friend at
Knoxville few months since for a copy which was
denied me- The letter, however, has been shown
to the present Comptroller, Gen. Dunlap, and eth
ers, and it would have been just as easy FOR the
writer Of the article in the Wing to have published
the facts u have given publication to the false
hood. The Bank of East Tennessee never had any
account in the Comptroller's Tressurer's offices
after the passage of the resolution in 1854 Eve
ry trip made to Knoxville for tae purpose Of set
ing after the passage of the resolution an
ag,nt from the Bank Of Tennessee was there to re-
ceive it. 1t was not my duty to report delinquent
officers for the revenue OF 1855, as | went cut of
Off in January, 1856, end the custom Of the Office
by self and predecessors was TO report in August
of the succeeding year, all delinqutnts to the At
tnney General As to the suits between the Bsnk
Of Eist Tennessee and myself, well as those
against the Traders Bank, the public are not con-
cernsJ, 1 perfectly willing that the coats
should settle, AMI know those parties interested in
the Traders Benk have soft of objection to the
mode OF settlement chosen by the Bank Of East
Tennessee. had nothing to do with the revenue
paid int the Bank Of East Tennessee il 1885, as
was out of ofioe, and think it will be shown on
trial of the that my successor, Col Luttrell,
counselled the revenue collector owing by far the
largest amount for that year, agrinst paying his
revenue to the Bank Of East Tennessee.
A. r. CRoZIER.