Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1859-03-24

On Certificates Number e1s7 for $4,000 1850
$3.50 1900. ..-..-.... 1856
4552 $500. o.......... 1856
1880 g 1000. 1850
There also the accounts Of Goddard and St john
the eastern bankers Of the Seneca County Bank accounts
Of purchases Of Stocks for this amount for which money
Is sent forward fast obtained nom the deposits Of
the County and State Treasurers and other dePostOrs
There is also entry of 81 $50 for interest received
from State stocks which Is interest $4,000 and when
Chittenden leaves the above amount Of stste stocks is
found on hand
But whether the stocks were really at the Treasury
before the resignation and when they
placed there, does not appear
Compare the circulation obtained above with the
stocks on hand somewhere and discrepancy arises Of
$bo wcn according to the rate at which State stocks
We're then selling would be excess Of about $1,000 Of
circulation over stocks
Bear in mind that here is power of attorney
from the Treasurer to collect the interest on
S55, 900, and they give an entry that shows that
this interest was collected. Now can any man.
this commission always excepted, tell how my
power of attorney, as Treasurer, could be of any
use to Mr.. Chittenden, or how he could draw
the interest upon it unless / had the stocks. And
they then 90 on to say, that when Chittenden
resigned on the 25th of July 184s, the S55,-
900 were found there Mark they do not in
innate that any more than S55 900 were found
there, and directly state that it does mot ap-
pear that any stocks acre there before he re-
signed
But further, it seems he had received circu-
lation of So, ,453, and there was, it is claimed;
only S55,0 900 of stocks, if there was any; and
they go into calculations to show that there
must have been an over issue of S6453. This
is put forth with apparent seriousness and, with
out anything further, it might be supposed that
the committee believed it. But to show that
they could not have believed it, there follows
the following receipt:
Treasury Office, Ohio. Columbus Nov. 1s, 1s4T.
Received Of VIM. L. Chittenden, Esquire Cashier
dollars in Ohio State stocks the use
ofthe Seneca County Bank A. A. BLISS, TT. Of State
$4,000 per r HUNEn
Now does any one suppose that Mr.. Hume
gave this receipt land this department was en-
trely under his charge) without getting the
stocks? Here is receipt for $4,000 of stocks,
of the date of November l3, lS47-the same
date of the first issue of cireulation-which de-
monstrates the fact, that the securities were reg
ularly deposited before any circulation was is
sued; and yet in the minds of the commission
ers there is great mystery connected with it,
and they sought in vain for solution of it
Why, they say the power of attorney to collect
interest on S55, 900 stocks given on the 9th of
OCSCAADClt dhA bHC lSNClDb III DAOfoDO OA bAC
18th Of November contradict each othern
And how is this, and what would any man of
common fairness, who knows as much about the
stocks of Ohio as these men must know, infer to
be the true state Of the case, even from their
own showing2 Why just this that on the 18th
of November $4,000 of State stocks were de-
posted, and the circulation commenced to be
issued upon it. On the 9th of December the
Cashier obtained a power of attorney to draw
the interest on $685. 900 Of these stocks. And
why not on the whole? For the good and sim
pie reason that there was S55, 600 Of these
stocks that were of a class called Foreign
Stocks; that is, stocks, the interest on which
was payable in New York on the lst of July
and January sem-annually. The Cashier rwould
naturally call for his power Of attorney Just pre-
vious to the time the interest was due, And it
seems he did obtain it on the 27th Of December
The balance of the stocks were undoubtedly
what are called Domestic Stocks-thstis, stocks
the interest upon which was payable at the
Treasury Office in Columbus and of course no
power of attorney from the Treasurer to draw
the interest would be required. Is there any
thing here that looks like a contradiction be-
tween the receipt Of the 18th of November and
the power of attorney of the 9th of December;
and can any one doubt hut this commission un-
darstood the matter fully?
/ am charged with having derived some ad-
vantage from the deposits Of the State during
my official term / do not understand the
Committee as intimating that placed the pub
lie funds in the hands of banks or bankers, to
be invested by them for their and my joint ben
eft. understand them as referring to an old
and well-known usage, acted upon by all of
my predecessors, and by every public deposi-
tary in the State. Ireceiyed and disbursed an
nually during my term from three to four mil
lions Of dollars, and gave bail in the sum of
| S250,0OO. Ny salary was, part Of the time,
81 600, and afterwards raised 10 1900. But
no benefit that accrued to me involved any risk
| to the public funds or any expense to the State;
and have never yet learned that the State lost
dollar during my term by means of any Of
my depositaries. The State has not I
believe been so fortunate in this respect with
any other incumbent Of that Office
1t is charged against me that l used the pub
lie funds in private investments and I meet it
with positive denial That invested money
during my term is most true, which in the Sc
quel proved most fortunate, not only for myself
but also for my official sHreties The argument
| which the Committee adopt to show that these
investments were made with the public funds is
as uncandid as 1t Is inconclnsive. They first
make it a matter Of offence and labor earnestly
to show that received considerable sums as
gratuities in connection with the deposits; and
they are willing to allow that 1 had several
thousand dollars of my own when went into
Office. They then claim that inasmpeh as my
salary was but l,20a, my Investments, made
chiefly in the last three years of my term, and
principally in the last year and hall, must have
been made with public funds
Il
the Committee claim to have supplied by the
fact alleged that l paid for stock bought in the
City Bank Of Cincinnati with an Official check
on the account in that bank. l do not remem-
| Der that this was So but if Mr. Heaton testiies
such was the case, he is undoubtedly correct.
The transaction, then, consisted of an exchange
of my own funds at Columbus FOR Treasury
check, and nothing more. This is just what
the Committees discovery proves, and this is ALL
If had intended to eommie fraud, 1t is hardly
| credible that should have done it in manner
most likely to ensure exposure, and spread the
whole matter out upon the books Of bank
open at all times to the inspection Of the State
officers If / had had OCCASION e use my own
means at any etneF point in the State where a
Treasury check would have been convenient
both to the Treasury and myself, 1 should of
course have ayaiied myself of such an exchange
This is the whole explanation of the matter as
suming the fact TO be as the Committee states
and no false reasoning can change it, While it
| Is made one Of nv offences that made money
| BY my position, the Committee viii not allow
that had the money they allege that made,
nor the credit my position contributed to give
me. rff .,--4sf
1have not stated to the Commit tee that my own
funds and the funds Of the State were mingled
together in the sense they represent it. Had l
during the last year Of my term, supposed it
possible that deficit existed In my accounts, it
| is not probable that should have made invest
ments in bank stock. l should rather have
!. A.