The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1870-10-13
1,1Os,s72 20
1851 OF
S2,111,1ss 81

&2,111,lss 81
The entire amount of 1896, ,973, "a is coolly put
down as expended on account OF old claims,
of ''claims incurred previous to the Inaugural
ton of the piesent State Government" Was
r. K. Scott incurred previous to the Inaugural
ton of the present State Government? 1t is
bad enough to have him now, but pray have
some pity on us and do not carry him by re-
lationn back to the better days of the State.
Was 81. II. Kimpton an old claim Did the
State owe that estimable young man $424, ,424,
before the Inauguration of present State Gov
eminent? trow not. Of the bills receivable
will speak hereafter. How far the items are
equally the dues of the present government, l
do not know The necessary facilities for sift-
ting the account are not within my reach.
But to return to the omptroller-generaPs ac-
count, and to that item of 81. 81. Kmpton,
S424, ,424 ELSEWHERE accounted for, having been
returned to him" Looking elsewhere l find
October 81, the last entry made thus: "By ID.
II. Kimpton S424,424." Now why was this
particular item selected out, to be deducted as
having been returned to him. Entries Of the
same character run throughout the year. There
was paid to II. II. Kimpton during the year
SS4S,84S. The entries are exactly alike, and
WHY should this particular one be deducted and
none others? In October the State received
from II. II. Kimpton $S19, ,7145O, and in Octo-
ber the State returns to 81. 81. Kimpton S4M,-
424 How is it possible to deduct this S424,4 ,424,
as an "old claim" incurred previous to the In.
auguration of the present State Government r
To put it in the mildest form, this entry throws
great doubt on the correctness of the entire ac-
count.
Let us look little further into this matter
of n. H. Kimpton. His account current with
the State for the year shows: To cash, 81 ,OO7 )
92354 by cash $492, 500 by balance, $5l5, ,4A.-
54. Total, 81, ,OO7 ,924.54.
October /, 1869. To balance brought down,
$515, ,424.54, or in plain English, that on that
day the State owed II. 81. Kimpton S515, ,42464
This is what Mr.. Kimpton says. The comp
troller-general's account shows that there was
received from H. II. Kimpton 81 AZ, 7l450
that there was paid to II. II. Kimpton, $S4S,,
S4S. October 81, 1869. Balance due Kimpton
$593, ,866.50.
The two accounts do not tally. The one &C.
count is made up to October l, the other to Oc'
tober 81. But this will not explain the differ.
ence.
The accounts of the comptroller show that
he received in October, from Kimpton, $S19,'
714.5O, and that he paid Kimpton $545, 1923
Now, if the accounts are fairly and correctly
kept the accounts should agree-the same en-
tries would be in each-add then to Kimpton's
account the receipts and payments in October
and bring his account up to 3lst October. Ii
results thus:
To oO7e24 81 By 1872 So
$3.50 o4 os7 s2
Balance due Kmpton. Sfos,ol
Total. 81, ,S27 63
And vet the Comptroller account only shows
| $593, $50, so as due Kimpton. In other words
there is an error of 195, ,949:4.
A word more, and we finish with Mr.. Kimp-
ton. His account shows that he received 81,
| 100000 of bonds. The same account publish
ed by the comptroller shows that he sold $500,
600 of the bonds, and gave credit for the pro
ceeds. The comptroller, in his report, says thai
there was a further sale of 100000 of bonds
report of which was not received "until aftel
the close of the fiscal year," and yet the comp
troller coolly says in the same report that there
are "S2 100000 of bonds signed up and placed
in the hands of the financial agent remaining
unSoLd."
It is noteworthy that Mr.. Kimpton's accoun
shows no charges for commissions, brokerag,
or any expenses or compensation. 1t is th,
boldest account possible. To cash. By cash
The plentiful lack of information it contains
attracted the attention of the Legislature, who
by Joint resolution, requested "of the treasure
report of the exact status of the State will
II. Il. Kimpton."
The reply of the treasurer was dignifed re
buke to any such impertinent curiosity. 81
says: Tn reply, have the honor to respect
fully refer your honorable body to the treasu
rer's report, made in conformity to law, for tn
fiscal year ending October 81, 1869 which con
tains all the information required by the reso
luton referred to-"
In fact not to put too fine point upon it, h
snubbed the Legislature, and the Legislator
submitted to the snub and relinquished thei
pursuit of knowledge. Anxious as I am
know the exact status of Mr.. Kimpton's ac
count, 1 dare not hope for better result.
m 9u a ue tbs ea
and Indifferent.
! The instances have giyen show that IL