New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-03-13

There it lie, made over year ago, ana mere
YOU have been in session two months anu
what have you done? Have you Tepealeu
this law? Have you amended IL Ii 50, IA
what respec? do not know. Inns ,,a,,ra
brought to the attention OF the LegisIa.u1s
the very loop.hole of this law, and here you
are irving to convict him in order TO niue
the sins of the Legislature. But you may
say. sAll very true. but you dld not I'm
NV with the law. You issued two hunurea
or three hundred warrants on vouchers .us'
we did not authorize. lnere 10 tulo
certificate, and there Is tna tho law =;
was lot not in accordance villa tne Jaw.
Grant it: but do you expect the Auditor
tn adIudicate on every single one or the
youcher-9 Has he not eighteen CLERKS! Is
he 10 be held responsible criminaily for their
mistakes? Civilly we admit his response l.
bility. No man can commit CRIME through
an agent unless he procures him to do IL,
but you can mot commit crime by agency; you
can procure it to be done, but when the
sgent whom you employ does the guilty
thing without your knowledge or procure
ment, you are not responsible.
Here these clerks adj udicated on these
vouchers, and they come In every instance
Of doubt TO the Auditor. and he refuses 10 let
the warrant be issued-and you want 10
hold him criminally responsible for these
mistakes when he has this immense mass OF
business to attenu 10.
Further than that, the managers have not
introduced one solitary pensioner as witness
to show that fraud has been committed;
they have not proven that the State mas
been defrauded. | call for the evidence:
take I'D the vouchers, gentlemen, and show
us who is not pensloner. lou nave not
examined one solitary witness before thls
court to testify that one solitary man lh"'
got warrant is not a pensloner under tnt
law. And, forsooth, because the amount OF
the appropriation was not stated IN the
act. though the amount appropriated
to each person was, they introduce
all these vouchers to overwhelm US with
three hundred cases; but they have not taken
the trouble to bring one solitary man here
TO prove that any one Of the three hundred
is no. entitled 10 pension They dld not
bring one of those thirty or forty known
veterans here as witness; NOT even lhae
o.d drummer. Where Is the oruininet
Why is not his drum tapping here to the
success of these managers on these pension
warrants? Was there ever such LAME case
presented to any court OF justice. as lar as
this charge is concerned:
That disposes of the twenty-fourth, twenty.
fifth, twenty. sixth and twenty eventh arti.
cles. They are all disposed of; but, then,
there is article twenty eight-this grand con
fusion article. Suppose it all true, As alleg-
ed suppose it all proven, do they offer it to
show legally any crime? They do not even
allege any crime; but they allege, by inuen'
do, that we arc incompetent to hold ofhce.
This is the article:
ARTICLE XVIII.
That said George NJ. Wickliffe. Auditor
of Public Accounts for the State OF Louis
lana. unmindful of the high duties OF his
office. and of the dignity thereof. has kept
his office in such state of confusion aud
disorder, and so entirely devoid of system,
that it has been impossible tor him, the said
Auditor, to make report to the Governor or
the General Assembly Of the State. OF the
condition of the finances of the State, as
required by law, or for the committee OF the
General Assembly to ascertain the States
financial condition in any reasonable time
thereby proving himself to be incompetent
to perform the duties aud functions OF n:
high office. whereby the said George Ii.
Wicklitfe, Auditor of Public Accounts, did
then and there commit and was guilty OF 3
high misdemeanor in office and the HOUSE
of Representatives, by protestation, saving
to themselves the liberty of exhibiting. q
any time hereafter, any further articles, o
other accusation, or Impeachment agalns
the said George NJ. Wicklitfe, AuOhor
Public Accounts of the State of Louisiana
and also of reply ing to his answers, which h
shall make unto the articles hereinbefor'
preferred against him, and OF offering proc
to the same and every part thereof, and 4
all and every other article, accusation, o
Impeachment which shall be exhibited b.
them, as the case shall require, do deman'
that the said George NJ. Wickliffe may be pu
to answer the high crimes and misdemeanor
in office hereinbefore charged against him
and such proceedings, examinations, trial
and judgments may be thereupon had an
given as may be agreeable to law and justit
So the allegation is, 'You, Wickliffe, KEEP
your office in such an utter state Of confu
sion as to make yourself utterly incompe
| tent: you have proven yourself that you are
utterly incompetent"
Where is the statute of the State of Louis
lana making incompetency a crime? Wher
Is the political court to pronounce the Judg
ment of incompetency Great heavens, Mr
Chief Justice, if incompetency W, re crime
who would go unwhipped of justice? Hon
| few of US are competent Tor the position
| we hold? Would to God incompetency were
| a crime and that men would be punished TO
| daring to occupy offices for which they ar
| incompetent. If it were sO few, Mr.. Chic
Justice, would seek office, and fewer still r.
| tain it. Incompetency crime? Why /
| that is the case the Governor ough. to 81
! indicted for signing such dangerous law
| as this pension law, and this printing act
1ndL OleDOSeS VI aillCie t"euty-ciSut, w
| twenty-eight enables us to getrid OF twenty
| two, Why? Because twenty-eignt is IN.
| defense of twenty-five. You say in twenty
eight that my Office was in such confusion
| that sit was impossible for me to make an,
| report to the Governor or Legislature. Ii
| twenty-five you say l was required to rem.
der a report to the Governor, and failed
My answer is expressed in article twenty
eight could not, b. cause it was lmpossl
BILE. Therefore, get rid of twenty-five.
| will not go, as far as confusion is concerned
| into any lengthy examination of the unaw
| full acts of the Governor, who unlawful
| took possession of the Auditors office
| What right had he to remove Mr.. Wick
| life, even though be had been indicted Of
the twenty fifth of March, and retain pos
session of his Office till the twelfth of May
He allowed him to remain in Office unit
after the adjournment OF the Legislature
and no sooner had the Legislature adlourne
| than he elected him from office With III
police. Where is the clause in the tonstltu
ton authorizing this removal? Is not hi
| Wickliffe constitutional officer? The Gov
| ernor undertook to remove Judges, anC
thank God, the Supreme Court of the Stat
| decided that there were some officers h
could not remove, because the constltutlo
forbade it. So it is with the Auditor and til
Treasurer. The Governor does this ate
| the adjournment OF the LeglSlature, VINE
it would have been his duty to have sut
mitted the matter to the Legislature Detor
their adjournment, so as to have MIN i'll
peached. But after the lapse Of tw
months. he springs the trap, elects him frol
office, holds possession of the Office for 81
weeks and all this Qstensibly for the publ
good
Then he brings these indictments in til
First District Court in November again;
| y1nT o a nd Ok
Legislature assemblies he makes thes
charges and subjects him to this tria
Then, when the law which creates the ot1iC
of Auditor renIireS the Office to be kent