The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1871-08-03
The Land Commission
spARrASBURG, S. c., July Goth, 1871.
N


Hon. c. p Leslie:
SIR-Ycrr letter of the 25th May, touching
the investigation of the affairs of the Land
Commissioner was received, and answered. In
that letter you prQpounded to me number of
questions, to Which you requested answers. L
am not reader Of the Republican, and your
communication addressed to me, through its
columns, Would not have been noticed by me,
but for the fact that my attention was directed
to it by friend Dr. Hayes was Chairman of
the Committee, and have some doubts as to
the propriety of appearing in the public prints
before the investigation is completed, and re-
port made to the Legislature.
Answer L. 1 conducted the examination for
the most part
Answer q All the witnesses examined were
sworn, their testimony taken down by the
Clerk, and subscribed by witnesses.
Answer 8. You were active in bringing wit
nesses before the Committee, and rendered i'm
portant aid in the examination of few of
them.
Answer f. think there were twenty five or
thirty witnesses examined touching the matter
referred to in this question.
Answer 5. do not know why the testimony
has not been published. The affdavits were
left with the Clerk with instructions to make
up the report. l informed the chairman that.
the testimony was in the hands of the Clerk
subject to his order. The Investigation being
incomplete, suppose to be the cause of its noh
being published.
Answers and 7. I think the testimony al
ready taken is insufficient to show that yon
have acted 'dishonestly in the discharge Of
your duties, or that you have made margins
or other moneys outside your salary as Land
Commissioner" But the testimony equally
conyinces me that you made an improper selec-
ton of agents. There can be no doubt that.
the State has been defraudcd through these
agents and land dealers. 1t does not appear
that you were party to these fraudulent trans
actions but you, at least, failed to enter your
protest, and expose them. On the contrary,
you approved many of them. You will hardly:
deny that proper discharge of your official
duty would have prerented many, if not all, the
frauds which were perpetrated by agents and
venders of land upon the State The conclu-
sion follows inevitably that having permitteda a
wrong, which you could have prevented in
wolves you in equal moral guilt with the agents
and land venders.
"Jui tacit per alum, facit per Sc" have
made the answer to these last questions more
at length that you might not understand that,
in my opinion, the investigation had removed
all suspicion from your conduct in the premi-
ses. Some one is to blame in this business;
and who but those connected in the Land
Commission? So far as the testimony has
gone you stand exonnerated from the charge
of dishonesty. But upon whom does the guilt
rest? You are at liberty topublsh. Respect
fully JOEL FOSTER.
p. S.-The above is substantially the same
as before written.
CHARLESTON, S. c., July 81, 1871.
Hon. Joel Foster, Spartanburg, S. C.:
DEAR SIR-Your letter dated July Goth, in
answer to my letter dated May 25th, has Just
been received am surprised at your letter,
and I think the people will be surprised. I do
not mean to speak dsrespectfully or unkindly
of your communication, but allow me to say
that if this is the best information you can
give to the public, in my opinion, it would have
been better that you never had undertaken the
task, or had turned the subject over to some
other Democrat who would have felt a sufh-
cent interest to have made q thorough investi-
CATION. The object of my letter was to enable
you to state from the evidence who the persons
were, if any, who robbed the State in conncc-
ton with the Land Commission, their names,
the amounts, and every particular specifically
set forth in connection Herewith, and exactly
the part took in any one Of those transactions.
By way of illustration suppose that Mr.. Hayes,
Chairman of the Committee of Investigation,
known Republican, had written the letter
you have put forth to the public, ask you if
the whole Democratic press of this State would
not have said, and had Il right to say, that the
report was trihng with the people, trifing with
me, and that it was whitewashed from begin
ming to end.
Again, 1 ask, in the name of the people of
South Carolina, specific answer to the follow
ing questions First, who were the improper
agents appointed by me, and their names?
Second, how was The State defrauded by them,
and how much did they receive? Third, what
were the fraudulent transactions of which lap
proved To this much 1 think I am entitled
~ {. P. LESLIE.