The Orangeburg news. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1867-1875, 1874-08-29

FOR inc year cnIln5 tcioocr 8 1917
Legislative expcn's SIP o4o As
Puoic prinling...... 2I5, 20 Sj
-$o27,37 90
The figures CT the last table, that of 1872,
Viii show something OF what it cost the pco-
pie Of the state to secure the nomination of
F. J. Moses rs governor. lie then repre-
scntcd, rs he now does, the most rcckle SO
and tho most dishonest element in the re-
publican parry. But those figures. start
ling they are, do not represent tho whole
cost Of this man. There were legislative
cer.ifcat es and trcasurci's notes issued in
lieu Of them amouut'ngto over Si)0,0)0,
which were not then paid, many of them
still part of the floating d,bi of the state.
BY his connirancc the regulation requir-
ing the signature of the governor to dr., #
upon The treasurer was repealed, and each
Of the certificates became an o. dor upon the
treasurer, payable at sight.
The taxes for the year ending October 81 /,
1872, amounted to only Sl,2!S, 662.0 while
the demands of the pay certificate maker
and the printing ring alone amounted tc
more than 81, ,327 .37o.29.
In order to meet the unsuitable demands
i'll th"sc forms, and 10 pay the cur, cnt ex-
penses of the other departments, tn re was
no other resource than ,he issu. anil sale of
bonds. NJ ,scs and his support ltc-s had ia ken
nll raised from taxes; no new taxes could be
levied and the issue Of bonds became
necessity.
lie points out in his Su,n,er speech the
fact that the legislative expenses Of the last
year OF his administration decreased from
$3.50, 80 to S,2O2. 4OG. 81 lie should
have carried his comparison little further
back. Boil years togeih;.' do not equal by a
Mird the c1pcnses Of one yror under the speaker
sh:p Of F. j. Noses.
AZ the beg ming of the session of 1S71-72
| it became known that what is called an
over issue Of bonds had been made. The
bonds in question, were conversion bonds,
which had hopothecatcd mainly to raise
money to meet the enormous demands shs
| above.
In his Sumter speech tho governor de-
the bonds and utterly rcnounces the idea of
paying one Of them. But what was his ac-
| tion at time when he could have preven-
| ted the endorsement Of those very nc;s by q
| legislature in which he was allpowerful.
Let us see. Those interested in the bonds
| in question wished oil doubts set at rest.
| The officers who perfected them, and those
who issued them, wanted the sanction Of he
| legislature to their ac;s. The financial
agent was asking for n settlement Of his
desired to be made secure in what they had
purchased.
| Two bills were introduced to accomplish
these ends. One has been known rs the
validating bill, and the other rs the
settlement bill. The first was 10 relieve the
officers who perfect cd the bonds and those
| who issued them, ns we'll MS to assure the
| holders that they were perfectly good
| evidence Of Indebtedness on the part Of the
| State. The second squared the accounts of
the financial agent, and accepted his settle.
ment. To show how clearly tho matter was
understood, it is neelful only 10 read the
preamble of the validating act:
can act to authorize the financial agont
of the State of South Carolina in the city o t
New York to pledge State bonds as collate-
al security and for other purposes, approx
ed March &c, 1869, which snd bonds are
fully md particularly stated and set forth
in report made by the trensurcr of the
State TO the general assembly, dated 0oto-
ber 81, 1871; and rkereas doubts have ar-
sen whether said issues were in strict con
formity to the provisions Of the said several
acts under which they were respect lively
issued; and rhereds it was the true in,snt and
meaning Of the several acts above set for th
that such issues Of bonds or obligations
should be made in the manner in
which the same have been madc, as
aforesaid and uhereas also, doubts have
been raised rs to the validity of some Of the
bonds mentioned in the said annual repor