Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-02-20
THE BROwNLOWs AND THE
SCHOOL FUND

GUN PhClGg III eAO oSHOOA Aui1N
affair, reported to the House of
Representatives on Thursday that
they had partially investigated "
the case; that SO far nothing had
been developed that in the Judg-
ment of the committee demands an
investigation on the part of Col.
Brownlow;" and they ask to be
discharged from its further consid-
Grafton on the ground that it is "but
a renewal or rather continuation OF
the quarrel" between Gov. Brown
low and Secretary Fletcher. This
was a turn which was not expected
the committee would attempt to
give this case. We know nothing
as to the testimony elected by the
committee, except what was stated
by Secretary Fletcher on his exam-
ination. He states positively that
Col. Brownlow told him that Rutter
let him have $500, but why he did
let Col. Brownlow have this money
is not made clear. The committee
make no effort to explain any thing
| about it. But the strangest part of
the conduct of this committee is re-
lated by the editor of the Memphis
Ledger. He stated in his paper of
the 9th inst. that Mr.. Parham, the
lobby agent of Rutter, "knew that
the Brownlows had received about
two thousand dollars from Rutter, "
and he asked,
"DO the people require more proof that
our immaculate Governor received a
share of the missing fund.- If so, We
have other equally strong as the above,
and without that can convince any disr
interested party that the Brownlows res
ceived money from Rutter about the time
of the pending in the Legislature of the
resolution to make Rutter's bank the
fiscal agent Of the State
This was very plain and unmis-
taxable language, and the commit
tee were forced to summon the edi-
tor of the Ledger before them to
testify, and in his paper Of the 18th
inst, he tells the result of his visit
to Nashville as follows
The Legislature of Tennessee finds
itselgin a strange dilemma. After hay
ing appointed a special committee to ex
anime into and ascertain where the mis-
sing school fund had disappeared, they
are abruptly brought to stop by the evil
dence elected duplicating every promi-
nent leader of the loyal party. By their
! unceasing belaboring the committee,
whenever the subject is mentioned, is
proof positive that they find themselves
badly swamped and ruined by the action
of their own body. They would not for
the world have brought out the evidence,
as presented TO the House by the
special committee on the school fund,
if the shadow of a thought had passed
through their minds that all their promi-
| nent leaders were implicated in the ras~
cality But finding themselves in the
mire and their entire party blackened by
foul Disgrace, they are adopting a uni
versal system of whitewashing by pass
ing votes of implied censure upon the
committee, with a few whereases that
this or that brother Of the Loyal League
party is not guilty of taking part in steal
ing the sacred fund yet that is not suf-
ficient to remove the stain spots from off
the escuteheOR Of their party. Every
step forward leads them farther into the
depths Of disgrace, and finding that to be
the case they are beginning to repair
their lost reputation first, by dismiss
ing the committee, and then a process of
glazing over the unfortunate gentry who
are implicated, such as was done in the
case Of Speaker Richards and others Of
the came stamp We would like to know
of the Legislature why it was that we
were compelled to leave our business and
at once appear at the Capitol We were
informed by knowing ones that our pres
ence was required there by the direction
Of the Brownlows for statements made
in our editorial, published in the Ledger
a short time since II so, We were then
and are still ready to show conclusively
to an impartial public that the Brown
lows received from Rutter their share of
the sacred school fund VIII the upstart,
John, dare us the prOof2 lie did make
a show of having the editor of this paper
brought to Nashville by a summons from
special committee Of the House Of Rep
resentatiyes But after our getting there
and reporting his heart failed him, and
the committee was dismissed and we per-
United to return home All is well that
ends well But why not have us ex>
amined Why did not the committee
ask Rutter and Parham and others, how
much money was paid Brownlow by
Rutter. from time 10 time 2
Is it not strange that the commit
tee failed to examine the editor Of
the Ledger after having him sum
moncd and brought to this city? He
made 4 grave charge in regard to
the BrOwnIOws participating in this
school fund corruption fund, and
he was here to testify in regard to
the matter. Whose fault is it that he
was not examined? He goes home
and rciterates in a more positive
manner ifpossible his former states
ment that " the Brownlows received
from Ruttcr their share of the sacred
school fund and tauntingly asks.
Why did not the committee ask
Rutter and Parham and others.
how much money was paid Brown
low by Rutter, from time to time ?'
Can the Legislature adjourn with
out taking proper notice Of such
damaging statements as this? There
should Ee no whitewashing where
charges of so serious a nature are
made. DIR. McFail, of Williamson,
who was 4 member of the investi-
eating committee, stated when the
report was presented to the House
of Representatives, that be had
no hand in the report and did not
endorse it. If the BrowDlows are
innocent, as they claim to be, the
fact should be shown without any