, 1865-02-14

1l0Flsl1n 10r Inc ulltnG OF tle 01nce OF War
len, the Commissioners would have tue right
o fill tho Office BY appointment. But by the
let Of 1868 (p. G2), providing for the leasing
II this Penitentiafy at Joliet to James II. Pit
man, it is provided that said james N. Pit
nan sha1l, by virtue Of that act, be Warden Of
said Penitcnttary, take the oath. and possess
II the riq1as and po.cers. and psrtor1n al the
7aties Of Warden o1 said pcnitsntiary, subject
only to the general supervision Of the Board
of Commissioner"
Although the act nf,sesaid seems to
the possibility of q transfer
Of the lense, the provision move referred to
requires that The duties OF Warden shall be
performed by said Pitman IN person, at least
during the continuance Of such lease, and
contains no authority, eith"r expressed or
implied. TO- assign the Watdcnship. and ID
or perhaps. in certain events,
The Governor, would, except for said act,
hare had TO fill the office BY appointment
The terms nf the act are positive that Pttman
shall be Warden, and fulfill thu duties without
condition or limitation Of lime or reservation
Of authority to fill the office In any event. It
would seem therefore that without further
legislation, unless the Office is filled BY Pit
man It Is vacant.
Samuel i. Buckmaster claims to be the as-
slgnee Of the Pitman lease, and either by vlr-
tue Of such assignment or an appointment he
became Warden. aud has taken the oath, and
given bonds required by the general law re-
feared to, but unless he became such Warden,
the oath and bond, 60 far as they refer TO the
fu]fllmcnt OF all the duties Of office, are Of
no legal force. It il well settled rule Of
law that IN cath TO fulfill the duties Of an
office, which the at1lant does not hold. or
perform any act not required hJ law, wilt not
sustain an Indictment, and bond given un-
der like circumstances is withont conside.a-
I. 31f5
conld ble each Of the conditions Of the bond,
requiring the faithful performance OF the
duties Of Warden be assigned. when the OBJ
Igor was not such Wardens It would be 8
material allegation in declaration of such 3
bond that the principal obligor Fas appointed
Warden, and being such Warden be entered
into the bond, Sc, as such Warden it Was
he neglected OF violated his duty, &c. Tho
Penftentiary at Joliet Is therefore in the banda
and under the control Of person without
authority to enforce the discipline thereof
and without responsibility to The State for
his acts, except such as msy be implied hJ
said Buckuaster becoming the assignee Of the
said lease and those conditions In the bond
providing for the ,fnl6llment OF the terms
thereof.
The Third Section Of Feb. II, 1903, not on.
~ confers the duty Of said Pitman with the
duties and authorities thereof, hut IN es-
sential part Of the agreement By him which
he cculd not fail to fulfill without violation
q e shs contract: :. Ibs lengaaege u that he
P<aNmtiarv, d." !" subject only 10 general
supervision Of the Board Of Commissioners" )"
The lease makes all the agreements therein
contained conditional, and providea
that "in case the said James II. Pitman,
hssee, &C., shall IN any wise fail to perform
the conditions Of the contract, The Commis.
rs< 3Hx+ A4rr$$h tAA ~
of the Governor Of the State, may again lease
eaid Penitentiary, Or mansge or control the
same till the ue1t session Of the General As
semb.y."
In deserving the Wardepehip Of the Peni-
tentia1y, and falling to rrform the duties o!
that Office from July 1868 TIL the present
time, and leaving the aame in the hands Of a
and enforce the discipline according to law,
and without responsibility to the State, the
said Pitnan' has forfeited all his right in said
lease. and the benefits thereby conferred, and
the sssiguee thereof having taken the game
with full notice Of such default, and being a
party thereto. took the eane subject to al
the rights OF the State to declare forfeiture
and 1esume control Of the said Penitentiary.
II Was undoubtedly the duty of the Com.
m1saoncrs, by and with the consent OF the
Governor, to asaume such control and relet
the Penitentfary Immediately upon the breach
Of the condition Of the lease reh:rred to, but
that power ceased with the meeting OF this
General Assembly.
II ha. therefore become not only the right
hut the duty Of this Assembly to declare aid
lease forfeited and annulled, and pzoyide
for the appointment Of a Warden and the re-
eumption of the administration OF the affairs
Of the PeniteqtiarT, or that 1t be relet On the
teImt and condition Of the lease.
WHO WERE PARTNERS 70 TIE LEASE.
Who were partners to the lease Of 1858
James N. Pitman, the only and original per.
son named In the lease granted BY the Legis.
lature In 1868. gave his testimony yesterday
as to whom were the parties associated with
him In obtaining it, and who became hla
partners imme diate1y after 1t WAS obtained.
In reply to question from the Chairman OF
| the Committee, Mr.. Pitman said: j,
"samuel &. Casey, Ira A. ". Buck and Samuel
A. Huckmsster were interested with nc in thai
leasc act before and al the time Of its passage BY
ter Interest. Tie understanding as to thepartner
chip WAS not in writing, but verbal agreement
Amer the lease had been passed the parties named
signed by myself, B1cfmas;er, Buck and Casey
ill., ss sFo''e8 'i agreement 0esF date fe'f0a' zsn
A1r. Pitrnan, that samuel A. Buckmaster
, who Was member Of the General Assem-
bio, and Speaker Of the House Of Repre-
stntotfyes, and Ira A. ". Buck, who was al
.. the same time Commissioner Of the Peniten
tiary, werc both interested In the fraudulent
: leasa before and when It passed the Genera
; Assembly. By sirtuc Of the Law Of the State
both Of these gentlemen we're prohibited from
i entering INTO any such transactions with Mr
Pjtman, Or my other man who might ha1t
obtained the lease. They were both guilty
t Of fraud upon the State. I might add tha
! Buck continued TO exercise the Functions
: Of Commissioner for ten months after he en-
! tered into partnafshlp with Pi1man, and tha
: he thus bore the anomalous position OF Com
;. missioner for the State and contractor q
; the same time. ! might add TINT the testi
, mopy OF Hon William E. Powell. which l
given m this report, eaya that the Gnverno
. OF 1Ilis State was well aware Of DR.. Buck
i positfon, bnt declined to remove him.
| INFLUENCES TO SECURE TIE LEASE.
The testimony Of Charles Il: Reed, Esq.
! State Attorney, caused considerable e1cit*,
! mcnt and attention, partially from Its char
; acter, and more particularly from the icon
tempt" case which grew out Of his refusal i
| first to testify, on account Of his relation
! as counsel to the partiss. Mr. Reed said:
n The summer Of 1868, d.. John A, Hendrisk,
cago, and said be desired to consult me as an .!
| turney nbont bringing a sntt against Sam
Casey to Eettle up he partuerslip aceounta. u
M. Casey had charged up In The partnership q
| count vastous sums q money which be- (Hendficf,
! did not believe ought 10 be charged In the PAR
! ne1rhip aceount Of Hendricks Casey. BE shoa
| down, statement showing that horse and ca
risgc, or horses and carriage, had been furnishe
at Springfield. The paplr did not state Vho II
! rerton waS, or for Hhaf services. The paper ais
had wr1trn upon II the initials In capital letter
Of from slx to ten pcrtons. and Opposite thpse In
| tials were put drWu ccrtatn sutnB OF money.
only rrmenber the initials Of one person-the
| were y a. r.. IL $500" The othes Sums range