, 1861-02-07
[Ffom The Pioneer and Democrat Of the la inst
CARD.

he had illegally received certain moneys for which
he refused to account, claiming that ae held them
on private deposit.
lie also made statements in yindication Of him
self so totally opposed TO what | consider the
proven facts, that deem it proper to publish a
statement of the whole matter, that the public
and the partit interested may judge between us.
When entered upon my duties as Register,
on the 9th Of April, 1850, found on file instrnc-
tons from the General Land Office, dated Dec.
Is, 1856, and Jan. 16, 1859, not 10 allow any
payments on unSurveyed lands, or on surveyed
lands, where full compliance with the law had
not bCen proven; sLch payment being illegal
and void. In the instructions to the Receiver
then and now on file in his Office, aud dated be.
fore Mr.. Galile'des appointment, he was in
structcd, in cases existing urder the presumption
law, to allow no payments, except on the written
certificate Of the Register, showing tho quantity
and description Of the land 10 be entered.
In fact, o payment for land can be legally
made without the official approval Of both Reg
ister and Receiver, either un Ter the donation or
prc-emptOn law
1t is part ct the oflicia! duty of the Register
| Ito which my ut rntiOn has been twice called by
the Secretary Of the Treasury at the end OF
| each month, to examine the bOskS aud accounts
Of the Reeeycr--tO compare them with his own
to Ct rliy to his accounts as receiver and U. S.
"
and make special report to the secretary Of
the TREASURY.
That il was therefore my duty to exam ne and
report upon the accounts Vi the Receiver, is evil
d.nt
That my report did not msrcpresent hin,
will appear evident from tie following stItemenl
of facts:
Shortly after my appointment, tounl that
Mr.. q riirlde had illegally received certain mt
| a 4. -
q ID for which he had not accounted to the Gov.
u n nent. .....-.
In the case Of Andrew PrebSte, who p id for
his LAT d in 1857, h. fused to issu. an official
rec, i.t On account oi alleged irrrgularity in the
| pal ers lie refused 50 to report the payment
to the land Office, and ;ntiiuated that it was not
my business 10 inquire into payments made 70
him, on private deposits, as he termed it
| then stated that justice TO tho Ct imants re-
quircd that should r,I~rt the matter To- the
commissioner Of the Ian Office.
| have rep pnted to the land Office a simple
state nent of the iaot4, so far as they had come
to my knowledge, and ask for instructions.
My report was dated Aug. 3, 1861, and shortly
after Mr.. Garielde's term Of office expired, anu
| sir. Van Cieavr, tho T, sent Receiver, was az
pointed TO saccced him. No money held on Iri-
Vatr or public account was turned over By Mr..
Garielde, nor did he make any statement as to
what money he held in private capacity.
In the case Of Mrs. Mary Hust d, he issued in
October, 1853, All official receipt Tor $50, which
he stated, in his speech, could not be enter on
his books, because there was no Register to &C.
operate with him.
myself called his attention by letter, dated
July 30tl, 1860, to tnis east, aud received inT
answer that as his success had been designated,
he was not at liberty to act except in cases Of
absolute necessity. This mCn,y has never yet
been accounted for. The Commissioner, by let.
ter dated Sept. 27th, 1860, in answer to my re-
port, directed US (the Register and ReceiyeD to
make report, showing the facts in each case
the tracts for which payment had been made,
the date OF payment, &cr and, if possible, the
reasons why, in our opinions, the proper returns
| had not been made.
Il was also stated, that, after careful examin-
alton, no returns were found fDr the moneys al
| legged u have been received, and that justice to
the claimants deuIauded an early Investigation Of
Il cases.
Un the 18th Of Nov. 1860. I forwarded copy
Of this letter TO Mr.. Garliedc, enclosing it in a
tier Of that date, in order that he might SEND
in list Of payments. Receiving no answer, the
Receiver and published the commissioners let
ter, and called upon the parties interested 10
send in u list Of their namCs the amount paid,
&c.
The following list includes all cases which have
come to our knowledge:
$500 paid by j. B. Dickerson to s. Garlielde, in
1867.
900 paid by John Buchanan, in 1887.
90 by Mrs. Mary Hustled, 1859.
200 BY Anirew Prrbstel, 1859.
ECO " McNatt, by G. Q. Terry.
25S j. & W. PrcbsIcl, paid to w. II. Rankcn
400 by David Parker, paid to 5. Garhelde.
200 by j. b. Knapp, to s. Gariielde.
2O0 - Murphy, to 5. Gariiclde.
137 Bennett Creecy, to S. Gariiede.
The payment Of j. B. DickIrsUn was takoa
up at my instance last spring, and that OF john
Buchanan, week or two since. In neither case
was payment made until il wns demanded
paid.
In the cases Of Andrew Prebstel, Jacob and
William Prebstel, David Parker and J. b. KNAPP,
the claims have long ago been surveyed, and We
(the Register and Rec,iv,r) have not iied NJ.
Garlic de that We would issue certificates on pay
ment Of the money.
lie promised two weeks since, to Mr.. Butler
P. Anderson, attorney in those cases. and also
to Mr.. Van Cleaye, that he would pay the money
la day or two. In his speech he stated that
hs held but $500, aud would not pay it ua,il he
hrard from the Commissioner.
The receipt which he issued to Mr. Parker
specifics that the money shall be paid the re-
| turn Of the survey, and the special plat Of the
survey is dated July, 1859. Mr. Van Vlect, Of
Clark, can testify so far as the payments above
alluded TO are concerned.
Mr.. Bennett Creccy, Of Cowlitz county, applied
through bis agent, Mr.. Burbank, Of the Council
| for the reiunding Of $l3I, paid by hi IN 1857,
| 10 Mr.. Garfielde. In proof Of the payment, he
has fiel tho following letter, which was written
while was acting as Register, and without my
knowledge:
OLYMrIA, W. L. July eth, 1860.