The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1870-08-03
More of the Land Ring.

strict accountability for the Infamous cheats
OF the Land Commission. These two off,
GERS are members Of the Advisory Board,
which consists OF five members only. It is
generally admitted that F. L. Cardozo, the
colored Secretary Of State, is plain-deal-
ing, straightforward man, and that the Gov
ernor and Attorney General could, with his
assistance, control at all times the action OF
the Advisory Board, which, in turn, has by
law absolute authority over the Land Com
| missioner, and directs al. his official acts.
The act providing for the appointment OF a
land commissioner requires that his bond
shall be approved by the Advisory Board"
and that he shall sin all the duties imposed
"upou him. be governed by their instruc-
'.tions and advice;" and that the Advisory
Board shall determine tie price at which
land may be purchased by the Land Com
missioner; and that the Land Commission
er ssAaN hold his office at the pleasure OF
sthe Advisory Board" This is enough to
establish the fact that the Advisory Board
are responsible for the official conduct OF the
Land Commissioner; and as the Governor,
the Attorney General and tho Secretary of
State are majority Of the board, these three
officials are, before the public, responsible
| for both the Land Commissioner and the
Advisory Board. Upon the Executive OF
the State, R. Z. Scott, and upon the first
law officer OF the State, D. n. Chamberlain,
there rests, however, heavier burden. If
they could not, as a minority, prevent the
completion of illegal and corrupt bargains
by the Advisory Board, they could take their
stand upon the letter VI the Law, and, as
faithful guardians of the public interest,
bring tie offenders before the courts of the
State. Nor will it be denied that the Gov
ernor and Attorney General could well,
without the assistance Of Secretary OF State
Cardozo, hold in check the schemes OF
Comptroller General Jillson and State Treas
urer Parker. Governor Scott was supreme.
The members of the Advisory Board dared
not quarrel with him, and he and his hench-
man, Mr.. Chamberlain, had, at all times,
the power to prevent stealing by their col
leagues, or by the Land Commissioner.
This they did not do; and the people, who
bide their time, will not allow them to escape
the consequences of their carelessness or
crime.
That public opinion justly stigmatizes the
operations Of the Land Commission as an
infamous abuse Of power, and q scandalous
waste Of the funds of the State, is shown by
the cases, lately brought to light, in which
three and four times its value has been paid
for land bought by the commission, the ex-
cess going, not into the pocket Of the seller,
bat into the money-box Of some officer OF the
State. In Charleston County the Land Com
mission paid sl2O, 900 for tract OF land for
which the seller received only $50, 000-Ioss to
the State $50, 900. In Oconee the Land Com
missioner bought 1000 acres of land at Sc an
acre, which was not really worth more than
So an acre-loss to ate State $4,000. In Lancas-
ter County the Land Commission paid SSO32
for q tract of land declared by residents Of
the county to be utterly worthless-soSs to
tile State ssO32. In Beaufort County the
Land Commissioner bought about 1900
+ acres Of land at So Is an acre, and made the
seller sign titles at the rate OF IS an acre
loss to tie State s55OO And now we have,
in the following letter, the particulars Of a
similar transaction in Darlington County:
TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEWS
The exposure you are making of the viola
ton of oaths and law on the part of Scott, the
law officer of his crown, and of his obsequious
Legislature, In the matter OF the Land Commits
sion, calls to mind one singular circumstance
in the great swlndle.
| By order OF the court, the clerk sold, on the
9Th December last, at Darlington, the lands Of
the late Colonel Samuel H. Wilds. on these
terms, to-wtt: One third cash. the other two
thirds. to be secured by bonds, personal sure
ties and mortgages.
One John Lunney, county auditor, county
senator, and willing tool of that vulgar up
start, G. P. Leslie, became the purchaser of
three tracts, parcel of the Wilds lands, for
the aggregate sum Of FIVE thousand nine hum
dred and eighty six dollars ard ninety-fve
cents (s5,ss6 95.) The cash payment was
made, amounting to one thousand nine hum
dred and ninety-fve dollars and ffty-eight and
one-thlrd cents (sl,o95 5st.) No other com.
pllance with the terms of the sale has ever
been had, and no title has ever been made to
Lunney. Yet, on the 9Th of January, 1870,
Lunney, by deed, sin consideration of eleven
thousand six hundred and three dollars and
seventy-fve cents (sll, ,6O3 75) to him paid BY
Charles P. Leslie, land commissioner" con-
veyed to said Leslie, and his successors In office,
1871 acres being his purchase of the Wilds
landslide number of acres having heen ascer
tanned by one - Jackson, So! .,yor to the
land commissioner. The deed was admitted
to probate on --; dover was renounced
on the date of deed, which was recorded June
23d, 1870. Twelve dollars tSl2) Of stamps
were paid. On the memorandum Of the auc-
tioneer Lunney was named as purchaser.
When the clerk was preparing transcript OF
the sale, Lunney O. .,tred G. P. Leslie to be
namrd as purchaser, and afterward had that
name erased and his own inserted.
Thus the difference between the sum named
In the deed as paid, and the cash paid IN By
| Iunnev amounta tn tho s,Im of nine Thousand