The weekly Ottumwa courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1857-1872, 1866-04-12


drafts not yet endorsed, and which he can.
not receipt to you until they are endorsed
for S21 $50 14?''
AS Orwig had received and endorsed oil
the drafts received i'm 1865 ercept the three
phich Major North had deHrered direct to
Holmes, for Butler, Aidmakee and Clay-
ton counties, could not possibly have been
any other than the identical drafts that
North had delivered over to the Treasur-
er which Orwig in another breath has the
boldness 30 state he knew nothing whatev-
cannot be other wise.
1t is further provsn in the following
way: .....
Take the amount of Butler
County Sl5,l25 ca
Alamakee, $3.50 STA
clayton, 245 ls
The three delivered by North
to Holmes and they foot up S2I, $50 Is
Just the sum that Orwig says in the let
ter, the drafts held by the Treasurer ''not
yet endorsed' amount to.
The demonstration is clear then that Or.
wig did include in his statement to the
Governor in the letter Just what he says he
did not include, the three drafts that the
Treasurer had received from North, and
which Orwig afterwards endorsed under
authority of the Governors letter of JuIv
9Th, written in consequence of the one from
Orwig To him.
This attempted explanation, then, Of
Orwig of his false statement i'm his letter to
the Governor, only makes the matter
worse by adding to one misrepresentation
still another. And the letter must stand
as additional and, when taken with the
rest, convincing evidence that he applied
| the missing drafts to his own use, ans.
sought by studied effort to conceal it from.
the Governor.
| .turther evidence corrohorative of this
idea is, that Orwig stated i'm this letter and
upon other occasions that the reason of all
the trouble in relation to the matter was
the delivering of drafts to the Emigrant
Company, and the sending of drafts to tho
Department, without notice to what coun-
ties they belonged. He continually gave
as a reason for the absence of some of the
missing drafts, that he supposed they had
been delivered to the Emigrant company,
when, as shown since, those same drafts
had been received by him.
! II, as Orwig claimed, one cause of confu-
sion and difficulty was the not being noti-
fled by the Department to what counties
the warrants belonged, it was, evidently,
his duty to have written to Washington i'm
order to ascertain. When asked by Har-
vey, he states that he ''did write several
times" nut adds, 81 do not remember the
dates;" and he again states the same thing
in letter to Moore. But the facts i'm the
case are, as shown by tho records and files
of the Executive office, by correspondence
from the Department, and by letter of
Commissioner of General Land Office,
written since the commencement of this
| investigation, that Orwig wrote o,aIy one
letter, and that was on the 10Th of June,
1855, and dsimply-requests the Commission
er "to direct drafts to the Governor to Des
Moines, and not to deliver them to any
agent of the State.' .r-....
We might dilate more extensively upon
| the different portions of testimony, run
ming through the whole record, to support
the correctness of our conclusions, but do
not deem it necessary to further prolong
the report. To take up and speak of all
the testimony is too Herculean to be un-
dertaken, and we close this part of the re-
port with the general statement that the
justice ana correctness of our finding, is,
in our opinion, thoroughly substantanted
by the whole evidence of the case when
taken together, much of which could not
necessarily be touched upon herein, and
which we herewith report for general ex-
amination; leaving all matters not strictly
relavant to the main inquiry as to how
much and where the Swamp Land deficit
is, untouched by us, and in such positions
as the testimony may put them. . ...
To recapitulate, then, in conclusion, we
find that the amount of the Swamp Land
Indemnity deficit is S33, ,994 s3. and that
this deficit is in the hands of r. G.. Orwig.
The Committee find further that on the
10th day of December the said r. G.. Orwig,
for the purpose of securing all parties in
terested against any loss that might result
or accrue from the receipt. endorsements,
or non-accounting of said Orwig, executed
to b. +. Allen, as Trustee, the Deed of
Trust and accompanying defeasance.
The value of the property included in
the Deed of Trust is estimated by some as
high as<s50, 900, with membranes of SlI,-
900. This is what Orwig puts IL at. But
from the testimony of Mr.. Withrow and
rom othe information, we put the value,
after deducting membranes, at about
S30, 900. ..
The course, which in the opinion of n
majority ofthe Committee should be adopt
ed and pursued in relation thereto, is point
ed out in the resolution hereto attached and
herewith presented at the close of this re-
port, and its adoption by the General As-
sembly recommended. Sn-.-.....
The foregoing Report was written with
the view and under the agreement or I'M
derstanding that it should be joined in by
all the members Of the committee. This
was desirable, and for this purpose the
majority of the committee were willing to
concede not little, and modified the orig
inal plan of the Report to the extent of lay
ing aside fifteen pages of manuscript which
seemed in some of its details Objectionable
to the minority, in order that it might meet
the approval and be satisfactory to all the
members of the committee. which il SEEM
ed to after most of it had beei read and
submitted TO them.
But at this late stage, and while on the
eve of submitting the Report, those men,
bers of the committee belonging to the po-
litical minority in the Legislature, have
for some reasons (perhaps satisfactory tn