The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1874-05-17

STATE OF LOUISIANA,
Executive Department,
New Orleans May 18th, 1874.
Hon. E. Abel, Judge First District Court:
SU-In some remarks made by you from
the bench yesterday, find you reported il
this mornings Times as saying You cOult
prove that he (Mr. CiintOn) had paid him
, self $751; 900, also the Governor, 937 900 !;
also that frauds innumerable had beer
and were still being perpetrated, of man,
Of which Mr.. Clinton was aware.
Apart from the personal reference to my
self contained in your remarks, my duty tt
the public requires me to ask whether yOnl
statements as above quoted are correctly
nish me the proofs on which you base
your assertions. Very respectfully,
(Signed) WIN. P. KELLOGG.
New ORLEANS, May IA, 1874.
His Excellency VIM. Kellogg Governor of the State
Sr-YOur letter Of the 18th inst. was re-
ceived through the mail.
In answer, can only say that am in nc
way responsible for the reports Of news
papers, nor am l responsible to you for
my judicial acts. l waive that answer, and
all said upon the occasion referred to by
you, was taken from the directors reports
Of 1884, and acts of 1884. He had
failed to pay me about sixteen hundred dol
lars due for my last quarter, ETC., Of last
year and previous. Under the heading of
"zacheus Come Down." taken from one of
the journals Of the city, he used most disre-
spectfnl language to the court, for which he
was reproved sharply.
In his distribution Of the peoples money
he appeared to be SO partial, took occasion
| to remind him Of it.
| On pages 80, 40 and Al of his report for
1874, it appears that the Governor and his
attaches were paid more than thirty-one
| thousand dollars.
On the same pages, it appears that the
Auditor Of Public Accounts and his attaches
were paid more than thirty-seven thousand
dollars. This, and the payment of other
officers in full-1873-led me to believe that
the grossest partallty had been exercised
and took occasion to refer TO it with re-
port in hands, to verify assertions.
find in the Auditors Report for 1873 the
following language, in speaking Of legisla-
tive expenses: "This presupposes rigid
economy in the expenditures of the General
Assembly, the expenses Of which should not
exceed one hundred and thirty five Thousand
dollars for extra and regular sessions" Yet,
on page Al Of his report of 1874, he admits,
d
sessions above referred to, two hundred and
ninety-three thousand four hundred and ten
dollars and ninety cents.
By Act Ne. so the Legislature appropriated
ninety five thousand dollars for outstanding
legislative warrants, ninety-four thousand,
nine hundred and eighty-seven dollars
and seventy-fve cents, Of which has been
paid as shown by Auditors Report of 1874,
page 49,
On page 81 the Auditor admits that over
one million has already been appropriated
for the legislative expenses Of 1871, and the
Auditor adds that this would seem to be as
much as the services of that body were
worth to the State" and don't you think so,
Governor, without adding the $95 900 upon
the people, these hard times, and this is not
all.
By act Sc of 1873, General Appropra-
tions) page liz, there were 900 more APP
prOpriated for the session of 1871 in these
words: Appropriation for the mileage and
per diem of members, officers and employees
and contingent expenses of the General AS
sembly of the State Of Louisiana for the re-
gular session of 1871, $4,000, or so much
thereof as may be necessary, receivable for
taxes and licenses" In other words, pay
able by preference.
Why tax the people ninety five thousand
dollars by act so, and twenty thousand
by act Sc of 1873, when according to
Mr.. Clinton's statement il his report Of 1874,
page 81, more than one million had already
been appropriated for the expenses Of the
General Assembly of 1871 alone, which &C
cording to his calculation of one hundred
and thirty-tive thousand dollars annually
would be nearly fold, and l am in
clined to think that his estimate Of the ex-
penses of the General Assembly will lie borne
out by the figures, provided all the mem
bers OF the House and Senate were present,
and still these appropriations are followed
by act No. SO, approved by you on the 10th
March, 1874, which, to my mind, is mon
strous piece of legislation 1t reads: For
legislative vouchers, warrants and checks,
issued by the General Assembly during the
years 1870, 1871 and 1872, which have I" been
by any committee Of the Senate
or House, appointed or directed to examine
said outstanding warrants, vouchers or
checks, the necessary amount is hereby ap-
For the years 1912 and '73, the statute
books and Auditors Reports well show APP
for about two millions of dol |
lars, three-fonrths of which has uLdonbted |
ly been fraudulently moulded into warrants |
few Of which remain unpaid |
The fraudulent warrants have Eeen mere |
substitutes for the burglars tool to e, ter |
the treasury Think of the act of 1874 |
+" For legislative vouchers, warrants and |
checks for 1912 aud 49," and more than
two millions previously issued tor these
years. Governor, how many such warrants,
vouchers and checks do you think could be
produced, if the old Spartan, Col. Field,
would get ont Of the passs 1 confess my
inability to tell but will try ana illustrate
by statement made in open court, in 1872,
b, my friend the Rev. Josiah Fisk, true
Republican and a Christian
He said, speaking of false registration pa
pers, that he personally knew OF t 70 trunks
large size) full, and had heard of third l
an of the mind that they could produce two
trunks full of legislative vouchers. warrants
md checks for 1870, 1871 and 1872, and if
my money was left in the Treasury, like
ny friend Fisk, would hear of a Thru.
Governor, ii you think that these acts are
INST and fair, and that the Auditor of Public
Accounts, alias ''Z.ch-us Come Down." has
iirly lisbnrsed the public moneys,I do not.
lhis difference does not arise from any I'M