New-York tribune., 1872-01-18
uP. TERWILLIGEFS CASE.

the grave charge. sworn to by Mr. Edward
Oracle. that Mr.. Terwlllgcr altered certain
bills of Weed, Parsons & Co. for printing. so
"a to make the State pay them and him several
hundred dollars more than they had claimed
charge which is explicitly denied, and which,
therefore, we shall hold invalid unless it shall
be sustained by an appeal to the books OF the
firm in question. The denial being IA ex-
plicit and as well sustained as the ac-
cusaton We regard the latter as fully neutral
ized But it il admitted by the affidavit OF
Weed, Parsons & Co. that they paid Mr..
Terwilliger the respectable sum of S4,6S $50,
which il the exact sum stated in the affidavit
of Mr. Gracie-that this was "A per centagc on
"the work done,r (as Mr. Oracle had set
forth y but they say that this sum was com
"pcnSation" "for services, proOf-reading, &c.'
We deal only with these points in the case, be-
cause they arc no longer questionable.
Mr.. Tcrwliger was Clerk of the Senate-a
rcsnopsible and lucrative post That post gave
him power to influence the amount of PRINT
ing ordered by the Senate lf this capable and
experienced Clerk saw fit to suggest to a green
Chairman that extra copies of a report just
made by him were needed and should be or
dercd, that Chairman would be very likely TO
move the printing of those copies, and the
| Senate would naturally hate TO mOrtify him by
| refusing to order them. 10 was thus in Mr..
| Tcrwiliigcr's power to swell decidedly the
amount of the Senate's printing and of Weed,
| Parsons g. Co.'s bills against the State.
Did the Senators know that, when they so
ordered extra printing, they were voting very
considerable sums into their Clerks pocket7
tIov haH
of extra printing have had much weight with
them7 What is the common sense view of
| this matter? We feel confident that such
Senators as A. W. Palmer did not know that
! they were so enriching their Clerk, and would
have been surprised to learn it.
OF course, il this "per centager to the Clerk
on all the printing ordered by the Senate was
proper three or four years ago, it is proper
nor. Is Mr.. Terwilliger receiving his "per
"centagen on Senate printing done at this ses-
sOn2 If so, we decidedly object. 1t is clearly
forbidden by the spirit, and we judge by the
letter. also. of the Revised Statutes of our
State part ~, Art. 2, 50, 10, "Of Bribery"
&C., whereby the giving or promising of money
"to any clerk OF other officer of the Senate or
Assembly" with intent to influence his Off
cial Judgment opinion or action is declared
a crime, punishable by imprisonment for not
more than ten years in State prison or by
a fine not exceeding $1,000.
Mr.. Terwilliger must see, if he will but con-
| slider, that this sort of arrangement between
State officers and contractors will never do. The
former ought to be vigilant guardians of the
States interest, as against the possible rapacity
| OF roguery of the latter; but how can he be
if he If receiving "per centage" on those
very bills of contractors which he audits and
the State thereupon pays1 Suppose Mr.. Ter
wiDiger were to induce chairman TO move
the printing of 10000 extra copies of one of
his reports, at cost of $1,000, he would re-
ceive 5000 of this-for what7 Not "proof-
reading" certainly. Then for what "ser-
"vicesT r. Or what "&c.l" Let us under
| stand
Gentlemen of the present Legislaturei You
| were elected to put q stop to Just such trans.
actions as that we are calculating. If Won
don't believe it, wait till the People have a
chance to pass upon your Winters doines
aud they will convince you beyond mistake !