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

i IL.
eliminating in this trial by impeachment,
clearly indicates that there must be some
thing at the bottom of this. irrespective OF
the performance of mere official duty.
say this, because l know that another
officer here lately was reported to the Legis-
lature and to the Governor as defauter
and no steps have been taken to arrest and
punish him.
Ii Mr.. Wickliffe has been guilty of these
eXtortions, he has not taken anything from
the State but from individuals. Whence
this sudden love for Frances, tor Patrice
| Leonard, for Osborle-fOr the man osborne,
| who, like the Colossus OF old, strobe across
two States, one foot in Vicksb rig, one foot in
New Orleans, reaching one arm into the par
ish of Madison and plungiDg the other into the
treasury OF the State of louisiana whence
this sudden love for this class of men, when
another State officer has done such land
Office business, on so huge scale AS TO at
tract the attention of the Legislature.
| Whence, 1 ask, this extraordinary zeal.
Manifestly, it springs from personal feeling.
| Have not right 10 assume, from all the
circumstances surrounding this case. that
there must be some personal feeling, lndu-
cling and conspiring TO effect the end to get
rid of and convict this officer?
| say, therefore, and have alluded to 1t
merely for that purpose. that you, in weigh.
ing the evidence, are bound on your con-
sciences to regard and consider the motives
of the party making these Charges. 40
not mean the House of Representatives, /
do not mean the Honorable Managers, be-
cause it was done through executive influ
ence, and it was he who put the machinery
in motion.
There are only two other charges. ana
| they are all of the same nature-one is the
| cutting up OF warrants, and the other is the
remarkable extortion charges. What 90
you mean by cutting up warrant! Is Ihere
any such thing known to the law: The Au-
| ditor's law does not recognize any such
thing. The Auditors law was passed IN
lS4S, and re-enacted in 1855, when there
was plenty of specie in the country, abund-
ance of money, and all the Auditor had to
Go was to give a check or warrant on the
treasury for ten, fifteen or twenty thou
sand dollars; and, in that state OF things,
nobody wanted any splitting up OF war
rants. You could split your money up after
drawing it on your warrant; and l do not
know, sir, that the law ever contemplated
such thing as splitting up a
warrant. doubt very much, sir
whether under the law the Auditor
has right to split them up.
You never authorized 1t to be done,
and what you call splitting up warrant Is
nothing more than various subdivisions OF
the same warrant, of the same number,
marked A. B. c., etc. This splitting
has come into vogue and fashion in conse'
quence Of the exigency OF the finances OF the
State and the demand created by the law
making them receivable for taxes, which
YOU never ought to have done, because you
ought to get money in your treasury, and
gel rid of this trouble. Tie Auditor whose
business it is merely to issue the warrants
| or checks of the State, is called upon by
: somebody, who, for his own convenience,
desires him to split warrant up. to subdi-
vide warrant. say for $780, 900, and he wants
ten, fifteen, or twenty small warrants, or he
, wants five or six hundred small warrants.
say it is none of the Auditors business
J there is no law whatever to compel him
, and doubt whether he was even author
, | lied to do so. And ne tells these parties
You want me to take all this trouble fol
5 YOU ; you want me to convert these war
rants into circulating medium: yor
want to sell them as promlssorJ
. notes, you want me to do all this ior you; Il
2 cut your warrants up into small ones OF tive
J ten or fifteen dollars each, but If you do
t want me to do this l will charge you tor it
r | say he did this and / want you TO tell me-
t | whether there was any law prohibiting II
i You call that extortiOn; you call it extor
!, ton because he applied tor several addi
e tioEal clerks. Does not Dir. Peralta, the
e former Auditor, tell you that it takes 81,
4 clerks alone to cut up warrants-lt has De-
D | come a science. Even ii he has done this
r it is none OF your business; we say there Il
no Law prohibiting it; you say it Is wrong
i | we say it is right. Who Is TO decide! Arr
& you to decide according to your opinion
5 And there comes the principle for which
E; have contended; there must be some Law
5 prohibiting it, and if there is no law, hi
4 | has right to do it. Take warrant o
J. 500, 900 and it never was contemplated by TIT
| law that there should be but one warrant
= The law never contemplated that 1t should
be sub.dvided one A, 3, c. D, and so CT
| h. 1,,t.. hot uri
fore, we say boldly we did it, and If we dit
: it, what business is it of yours? And nov
e dare you, Mr.. Governor, to charge US will
: | this, as a crime, when it was not our duty
;. aud we chose 70 charge for our trouble
:. | because there was no law prohlOitlng II
7 | But you will say to US, you employed eXtr
3 clerks: you employed Mushaway and Mad
; den, when this gambling bill was passed
= Did Mr.. WiCkliffe pass the gambling Dill
g Did not some of you, Honorable Managers
f have something to do with the passage G
q. that act?s
+ Mr.. Manager McMillen: No, not one of lie
e Mr.. Semmes: At all events it is on III
5 statute books, it is a law, and you charge
!. Mr., Nickliffe, under the gambling act, witt
t the duty OF closing up these places, II Is tn
: thrtieth section OF the revenue act, an
y the Auditor, in his official capacity, havin
: charge of the revenue department, he is re
a quired to execute this law and to exact
Y license of $4,000 from each gambling house
4 How is he to do it? Was he not require
= to have these outside agents TO supervs
. this collection, to fnA out who had and VII
: had not paid? He employed agents TO d
: this; DO you charge that he paid tines
L agents out Of the State treasury? No, 90
!, merely charged that he employed people t
:. do it. Whist if he did?
J Here is the charge:
:. That said George NJ. Wickliffe, Auditor {
: Public Accounts for the State OF Louisiana
u unmind.ul of the high duties OF his Office
j. and of his oath of office, and in violation {
!; the constitution and laws Of the State, die
u in the summer of the year 4. u. one thou
:; sand eight hundred and sixty-nine, withou
y any justifabIe reason, employ four clerks /
% addition to the number allowed by law, an
= did, without authority OF law, issue cert
= Gates Of Indebtedness against the State &c
= payment thereof and did, furthermore. EN-
!, ploy two of his clerks-Mr. James MushaWa
% ana Mr.. Madden-outside OF his office. sn
. i'll pursuit entirely foreign to the duties {
Il his office, whereby the said George NJ. Wick
e life Auditor of Public Accounts, did the
4 and there commit and was guilty OF q hig
:, misdemeanor in office.
q 1t does not say that he issued certificate
\, | to Madden or Mushaway, or warrants I
q | them. It does not say he paid them. Bt
N what if he did? What harm Is there if 3
x did pay them? L. is not charged that
ic paid them in warrants or certificates. 81
you charge that he employed four clerk
% and issued certificates of Indebtedness
# them. We did; but certificate of indebted
,e ness is nothing, unless you choose to ratit
,e it. 1t is nothing but promissory not'
]. which has no value, unless you choose
"a pay it, And there is no penalty attached
N the act of the Auditor i'll Issuing certificate