The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1860-09-12
CONTINUED.

CONTINUED.
CHARGES AGAINST NoFsINGER REFUTBD.
The Governor next charges that Mr..
Nofsinger, the Republican Treasurer, was
a defaulter and that the State lost by
him S39, 963.OI, and that it was occasoned
by Mr.. Nofsinger Ioaning and depositing the
money. This charge | understand has not
even the gemblance of truth to sustain it.
In the first place, Mr.. Nofsinger was not
defaulter, neither did the State lose any thing
by him loaning and depositing her money.
He purchased in regular business transact
ton, to pay the interest upon the State debt,
bills of exchange, from Allen May, endorsed
by Michael G. Bright, and James P. Drake,
who are three of the great expounders OF
Democracy in Indiana. These bills at their
maturity were not paid, but protested and
returned again to the State. When Mr..
Nofsinger went out of office he delivered
these protested bills over to Mr.. Jones as his
successor, as a part of the assets Of his office.
Bright was then and still is good, but these
bills of exchange for some unknown cause,
have been suffered to remain in the hands of
the different Treasufers of State, ever since,
without the Governor even trying to collect
them.
If the State has lost anything by this de-
lay whose fault is it Mr.. Nofsinger since
he retired rom office, has had no control
over these protested bills, and could not
take any steps to collect them. Why did
the Governor fail to press those bills 10
collection, as the law required him to do,
and because the money is not made by his
failure to collect to charge Mr.. Nofsinger
with being defauter. Is Mr.. Nofsinger
defaulter by reason of his failure to pay over,
as charged by Gov. Willard Why then
has not Gov. Willard done his duty (Sec
4, page 3o7, vol. r. s. 1882 provides
For breach of the condition of any official
bond, by which the State is injured the
Governor shall direct salt to be brought
upon his relation" The Governor charges
Mr.. Nofsinger with failure to pay over,
which is a breach of the condition of his
bond. Why has he not directed suit to be
brought against Mr.. Nofsinger2 Does he
give any reason? He says, Mr.. Nofsinger
is a Republican. Is that any reason, why
Gov. Willard should fail to perform n sworn
duty If the reason is, because he did not
believe Mr.. Nofsinger had broken the condi-
ton of his bond, why does he now for
political purposes make the charge.
Gov. Willard admits that the State lost
by Mr.. Jones, twenty thousand dollars, but
what is his excuse for not doing his duty !;
and having suit brought upon his bond ?
Substantially this, because in 1856 the State
lost as he says by the Republican State
officers, more than 100000, and they then
passed no resolution censuring State officers.
Is that a sufficient reason for his failure to
do his duty
The resolution Of which the Governor so
much complains, says just precisely what
he admits. That the fiscal affairs of the
State have been badly managed" Is not
ghat true2 Does not Gov Wizards adj
missions as to these great losses, prove il ?
Does the resolution discriminate between
Republican and Democratic defaulters >
Does it not say that State officers have
been shown to be defaulters to large amounts
and suffered TO go unprosecuted ?" Is not
that true? Does not Gov. Willard admit
it'll Is it any good reason why a Republi-
can defaulter should not be prosecuted, be-
cause Democrat happened to be one olso
and rice psrsd
CHARGES AGAINST TALBorTs OVER ISSUES RE-
FUTED.
He next charges Mr.. Talbot, the Repub-
lican Auditor, with an over-issue to differ
emit banks of $4,000 That charge,
rather suspect is without foundation, aud
when the facts are properly understood, be
VIII ind that he has put the saddle on the
wrong horse. That over.issue was done
during the administration OF John 2. Dunn
the Democratic Auditor Of State, but the
discovery of the fact took place during The