The register. (Monroe, La.) 185?-1861, 1860-04-26
From the Baton Rouge Advocate.
MIR. HaralsOM's Statement.

We mentioned yesterday that the Register Of
the Land Office had issued II pamphlet rcjoindcr
to the Report Of the Investigating COMMITTEE Of
the Legislature relative to the affairs of that
Office. The Legislative Committee went so far
only, after lengthy Investigation, as to charge
AIR. llaralson with negligence and inattention
to the duties imposed upon him by virtue of his
position Mfr. Haralson replies to this allega-
ton, and directs his effort 10 the task of show
ing that the laws governing his Office are de-
iectivc. and in the absence of wholesome ones
he has been compelled to rely upon regulations
established by himself for conducting its bust
ness. Besides this general issue, the Register
further objects to the Report and the investiga
ton on another point, WHICH is: That the
witnesses were examined out of his presence,
thus dcpriving him of the privilege of eliciting
evidence in his own behalf ... ,s.D..s
After this complaint, the Register proceeds
to answer the Committees Report in detail. In
regard to the charge of the Committee, that
the rule established regulating the fling of an
pllcations for entries, Mr.. Haralson seems to
admit that it has failed to q secure the Objects
for which it was intended" but denies that
such failure has "opcncd the door to partially
and fraud" He then proceeds to fortify him
self With this very questionable logic: "For
argument, admit that the rule opened the door
to fraud, was there any law to prevent it; was
there any legislative provision to answer the
purpose for which the rule was madc?"
In other words (admitting the proposition
for argument) the Register adopts a rule for
the safe government of the Land Office, and it
turns out that the rule works injuriously and
leads to fraud, he yet allows it to remain in
force until the necessary legislation is had to
repeal it. lie mace the rule for filing applica-
tons, why did he not himself destroy it when
lie learned that it had q failed to secure the OBJ
jccts for which it was intended ?" Did it re-
qure that committee should point out its de-
tects to him !? -......
+ The Registers reminder to the Legislature of
its neglect TO pass laws for the proper conduct
ing of the business Of the Land Office is as
severe as it is just. He has read the "assemblcd
WISDOM good lesson, one which we hope
they will profit by at the next session.
Tbe charge Of the Committee that "each
person was permitted to enter his application
himself, for any quantity of land howsocver
great, and subsequently, to purchase so much
only us he DESIRED" and the further charge,
that many applications have been entirely
destroyed and oilers substituted by being pasted so
ctosely on the paper that The first could not be read.
are met by the Register in strain of special
pleading which wholly fails to justify the
practice.
In reply to the latter charge, Mr.. Haralson
says: ....
There were only six of that description,
ana they were placed on the application books
by Mcssrs Henry Avery and A, W, Bell both
OF whom were before the Committee and it was
KNOWN to them that these gentlemen were the
persons who pasted the applications. When,
they were under oath was it not the duty of
W.. .ne committee to have Intercepted them upon
inns matter it they believed any wrong was
sought 10 nave been committed by their acts ?"
There is here no denial of the fact as report
cd by the Committee. The question naturally
arises. why the Register permitted these paste
entries to be perpetrated 1t matters not who
did the "pasting," Or for what reason the Com
mlttee failed to interrogate Messrs. Bell and
Avery; the point is, for what purpose was it
done! Mr. Haralson, being the head of the
Land Office, the Committee very naturally look
ed 10 him FOR the information required, He
alone is responsible to the State for the pro-
per management of his office under the laws re- /,
sulat'ng it, and it is his duty to see that neither
nor fraud be practiced on the public
" any one connected or having business with
NE Land Office. Let us not be understood as
charging that such practices have been carried
'ut IN the office; we merely wish to remind the
iegister that his reply to this portion. of the
Committees report would indicate that such
hlnss could be, and be be none the wiser,