Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1860-09-01
S4,535,129.OO
$4,254,6S0.O0

" For ,corh done IN South
Carolina umd Georgia." S1,254 ,6S0.O0
You then deduct your estimate
made 1st November, 1856,
of the cost of the road in
South Carolina and Georgia
to that dato 3,654,O340O
Excess of' cost occr estimate,
up 10 Isl Norcmbcr, 1889" 5000, 0,6lG.00
The sum total of expenditures in the Treas
urcrs account, which you have charged to tho
cost of the road in South Carolina and Georgia,
comprises many items which aid not enter
into Col. Gwynn's estimate of the cost Of com
pleting the road in those States, and were not
expended in construction, and, therefore,
should not have been charged in your state
mcnt to the cost of the road in those States
These items are: Expenses, salaries, print
ing" &c, light of way in North Carolina
and Tennessee" interest on bonds," 90 loss
on sale of bonds and stock" debt due by
Anson Bangs & Co"-thc amount " due by
contractors being for advances made to them
on account Of their work, {" transportation cx-
pcnscs," (that is, of running the trains be-
tween Anderson and Pcndlcton( and " repairs
of the roadway" amounting in the aggregate
to S1SS,5S
In the sum total of the expenditures, you
charge to the cost of the work in South Caro-
lima and Georgia S166,399, the total cost for
engineering on the whole road from Anderson
to Knoxville. But you deduct from this sum
what you are pleased to allow for engineering
in North Carolina and Tennessee S53,7S
leaving charged to the cost of the road in
South Carolina and Georgia for engineering
SIl2,700. The just apportionmont of cngi-
neering would be in the ratio of the length
of the road 1t is SO miles long il South
Carolina and Tennessee. If engineering is
charged in this proportion the sum to be
charged against North Carolina and Tennessee
would be SI07 $50. You have allowed for
engineering in these States only S53,T ,TS0,
showing an ovcrchargc in round numbers to
the cost of the work in South Carolina and
Georgia of $4,000 If this is added to
SlSS, $50 the sum will shcw an overchargc,
in your statement, to the cost of the work in
South Carolina and Georgia. of more than
$4,000.
The next item of ovcrchargc in your state
mcnt of the cost of the road in South Carolina
and Georgia is the addition of S149 123 to
the sum otal of the expenditures in the Treas
urcr's report of 1889.
Not content with charging to the cost of
the road in South Carolina and Georgia the
sum total of expenditures on every account,
from the date OF the charter to the first Of
November, 1850, you pick out of the column
of " Receipts an item for reserved in Cash,
Bonds and Stocks, for the completion of Con
tracts" $40, 123-and add that sum to the
sum total of expenditures, Work done can
not be entered in the column of receipts
This would make the Treasurer debtor to
The Company 10 Tic entry, If it was not ba-
anccd by an entry in the other column Ac-
cordingly, the item of $40, 1873 is included
in the sum of $2,O7S,O 900, for construction !;
and the entry of $40, ,123, in the column of
receipts, is explained as being preserved as
security for the performance of Contracts"
that is, received or retained by the Treasurer
for the Contractors, to be paid to them when
they should have performed their contracts
1t cannot be retained for the Contractors, un-
less they had done work to that amount. This
charge against the Treasurer must be balanced
by an entry in the other column, and is iuclu
ded in the item for construction. The fact is
and the entries in the Trcasurcr's account, are
in conformity with the fact, that 50 ,07S, 800
does comprehend all the work that was done
to that date Of the report In the first para
graph of your letter when you refer to the
Trcasurcr's account for 1856, you say: 81
find, up to the first of November, 1856, there
was paid out and due for work 81, ,l02, 600"
When you take up the corresponding item
in the account for 1850, you say "therc was
actually paid o"t" 82,504,0O0 In the col
umn of receipts, in the account for 1856, there
is an entry, in the very words of the entry of
$l40, ,l23, in the column of receipts for 1859 !;
yet you did not, in your statement for 1856,
add the amount of that entry to the sum total
of expenditures. 1t was a curious freak of
memory, that in the short space of time ocou-
pied in writing yoIr letter. what you under
stood when you referred to the Treasurer s
report for 1856, you forgot before you referred
t. the Trcasurcrs report for 1859.
You have, therefore, overcharged to the
| cost of construction in South Carolina and
Georgia, the sum of $149, 1913, when you added
that amount to the sum total of expenditures.
BY your own statement you admit that the
cost of the work done in Tennessee is included
in the sum total of expenditures which you
have charged to the cost of the road in South
Carolina and Georgia
You make your. own estimate of what was
the cost of the work in Tennessee and state
it to be Sl66,666 This amount you accord
ingly deduct om what you charge to have
bceuthe cost of the work in South Carolina
and Georgia. You should have deducted
S302, 900, which was, at least, the cost of the
work in Tennessee. II may be more, but
fYf,ya nm examin ation Of TIA hooks am snre n