Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1869-03-26

as to himself and Mr.. Pruyn. Upon the
oath of the Treasurer, Mr.. 8. had made
statements-he had repeated only SO much
as the Treasurer had sworn to. He did
not charge the Treasurer with periury--he
had corrected his sworn testimony. Yet,
upon his sworn statement, the presentation
had been made.
The committee say the Treasurer acted
with prudence and caution-when no
charge had been made. Mr. Sweet op-
posed the creation of the committee, be,
cause he we'll knew it was for the purpose
of white washing the conduct of the Treas
urer. The committee say that, in regard
to the Penitentiary bonds, the Treasurer
acted with prudence and caution. He took
a bold and broad issue with the committee,
and contended that in the disposition of
the bonds the Treasurer had evaded the
laws and act authorizing the issue of the
bonds. The assumed defence of the
treasurer, by the committee, that he acted
as former Treasures had, was untenable
and would not be sustained The history
OF the State would not show that any
former Treasurer had disposed of State
bonds without receiving something in con-
slderation therefor and, if such prece-
dent had been set, (which he denied, } it
was no excuse why the present Treasurer
should violate law in his official capacity
The law creating these bonds specifies that
they shall be sold at par. They had not
been sold at all, but bartered away-not
by the Treasurer, but by the Penitentiary
Committee, fog land and site, for 65 cents
in the dollar.
The Treasurer was culpable for the dis
position of the bonds therefore. What
was meant by sat par 2" Simply that one
hundred dollars in bonds should be sold
for one hundred dollars in money or its
equivalent and he denied that any such
sale of bonds has been made.
Mr.. Sweet reviewed the acquisitions that
were made on the Public Treasurer for
these bonds, and characterized their Ian
guage as an evasion of the law, and he
could not find language to express his sur
prise thereat He could not see how in
telligent Senators on the committee of in
vestigatlon could make report that the
Treasurer had acted with prudence and
caution.
Referred to the unstamped mortgages,
the law requiring stamps no doubt OF the
requisition of the law in this respect, but
to stamp woul2 cost 50 600. Here was an
attempt to defraud the United States
what did they care-the mortgages were
worthless. The Treasurer of the State, III
an individual transaction of 800, would
not have consulted the Attorney General,
but in this case OF $4,000, 900 the Treasu-
rer satisfies himself by taking the opinion
of the Attorney General, and take mort
gage without stamps, and screen himself
by falling back on the opinion of the
Attorney General Had he the welfare of
the State solely at heart, he would not have
taken the opinion of the Attorney General.
He should have known what every little
fifteen dollar groceryman knows, and that
is no stamps on mortgages are necessary.
The job Of whitewashing was we'll done,
but the coating was a very thin one.
Mr. Sweet recapitulated the charges
were made by David A. jenkins on oath,
and statements made by himself. He
(NIr. S. had done nothing else but to pre-
sent the charges rs made by jenkins.
In regard to the Penitentiary bonds,
David A. Jenkins did not act as any of his
predecessors had acted. Other Treasures
may have sold bonds and received certif-
Gates of stock in return-making, at least,
a quasi compliance with the law while on
the part of the present Treasurer, he ald
not dispose of the bonds at all, but that the
committee bartered away these Peniten-
tiary bonds at 65 cents in the dollar.
Mr.. Brogden, Chairman of the Com
mittee, replied to Mr.. Sweet in defence of
the report which had been read. in his
usual forcible style. In the course OF his
argument he stated that the Public Trea-
surer had been unjustly and unfairly al
luded to by the gentleman from Craven
and Mr.. Brogden defended the conduct of
Treasurer jenkins at great length.
In reply, Mr.. Sweet said, "by their
fruits shall ye know them"-and proceed
ed to show that the Penltentiary trans
action was burIesque,-the act evaded,
often by the Treasurer, He was directed
to sell par-he never sold.
The bonds we're never sold by any one,
they were directed to be sold, 1t
stood seperate in this respect-to sell, is
implied. The Penitentiary
Committee never drew for money, but for
bonds. He wished to know where was the
law directing the Treasurer to deliver the
bonds.
Mr.. Brogden replied that the bonds were
sold at par, and sold when delivered for
the purposes for which they were parted
with and in no other way, and they have
been sold at par.
Mr.. Sweet was clearly of the opinion
that this method of disposing of the bonds
was illegal and not warranted by law; and
no mans high official position would deter
him from ferreting out malfeasance in Of
fice-nothing would deter him from rigid
All this talk about the dig
nifty of the State only melted him to q
more thorough investigation of fraud and
it was the dignity and
honor of the State, he wished to defend
and uphold.
The question recurring on the PROPOSE
ton to print.
Mr. Barnes, as one of the Committee
arose to an explanation, and defended his
position and that of the Committee in the
premises.
The Committee had Investigated the
matter impartially, and had made their re-
port in accordance with the facts brought
before them.
Mr. Robbins could see no substantial
reason to charge the Treasurer with cor
ruption. He understood the land was
bought for 100000 in bonds, therefore
the bonds passed off at par. He thought
The whole matter ga tempest in teapot.
He did not think the Committee intend
ed anything wrong, and therefore, be
thought it unnecessary to incur the ex-
pense of printing.
Mr.. Welker believed nothing new had
been elected from the Committee of In