Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1875-04-22

SIAte ne shall be deemed gullt1 O! e
mi5demeanor, and shall on conviction
be fined not less than five thousand
dollars, st the discretion Of the court;
and any person knoBinsly procuring
the same to be done shall be subject tC
the same'penslty.n It will be seen by
exhibit ID, frOm copies Of letters attach
ed to the testimony of Mr. Clinton, that
the warrants, although dated March II,
1874, were not delivered till after A1-
gust 20, 1874, and by reference
TO exhibit Z, which Is the testimony Of
the secretary OF the funding board, that
Mr.. Clinton had not signed these war.
rants at the time be proposed to fund
! them, which was nearly six months af-
ter they were dated; also, by reference
to exhibit <, which is the testimony Of
! Mr.. Mooney, who was warrant clerk In
! the auditors Office, aud whose duty il
was to draw all warrants, that the
writing in the stub OF the warrant book
is not in his handwriting. Another gus
! pieious circumstance connected with the
issue OF these warrants is the fact
that they are all dated the
same date, and numbered re-
speetively 2259, 23O4, 2845, 1895,
24l4 and 2444, six In all. The difference
between the highest and lowest number
ls 40 numbers, while both purport to be
I Issued the same day. Now the law re-
| Guires the auditor to number all warrants
| progressively, see section lS5, revised
statutes. Again, warrant No. .2606, is
dated March 4, 1874, three days earlier
than the date of these six warrants, and
yet 1t Is higher number. In the month
OF September, 1874, the auditor issued
warrants to the amount of $50, 800 for
maintaining the militia of the State,
said to be overdraWn by order of the
superior district court, 1t is
certain that there was no appropriation
against which this amount of warrants
was drawn, and the act was an unqual-
ified violation of the constitution, arti-
Gle l04, the order Of the court to the
contrary notwithstanding. [See ex-
hibit d. Your committee ind also
that the auditor issued warrants in favor
Of J. w. Armstrong & Co. for the sum
Of $40, 976 20, while no such sum was
due by the State. Your committee is of
the opinion that the hrm of J. w. Arm
strong & Co. is q fiction, and has no ex-
istence in fact. see exhibit 81 And
further, this wsrrant was drawn for sup
posed expenses Of the house against the
funds appropriated for the use of the
senate, and drawn, too, after the unex-.
pended balance OF the appropriation had
lspsed, as provided in act No. IA of 1872.
page 40, that the auditor has drawn
warrants on the treasurer not authorized
by law, has been shown that he has
misappropriated funds is fully illustrated
by exhibit l. Section lS4 of the revised
statutes reads a. foilews: "No warrants
shall be drawn by the auditor nor paid
by the treasurer, unless the money to
pay the same has been previously appro-
priated by law" And section 196,
reads thus: "Should the auditor know.
ingly issue any warrant upon the treas
urer, not authorizedi by law, or should
he willfully neglect or refuse
to perform any duty enjOined by law,
or be guilty Of any oppression
or extorti0n, or receive any fee
or reward for the performance Of any
duty not allowed by law, or should he,
by the color Of his office, knowingly do
any act not authorized in any other
manner than is required by law, or ille- |
gally use or nlisapply any money be- |
longing to the State, hO shall Se deemed /
guilty OF misdemeanor in Office, and
upon conviction be fined not more than
Sl00 and imprisoned not more than five
years, and be dismissed from office.
Exhibit K is the testimony of T. F.
Monroe, who was clerk of the commit
tee appointed at the session of 1874 to
examine the auditor's books, etc.
The committee made no report, but the
clerk testifies to the fact that the tax
collectors paid to the auditor, on ac-
count OF taxes and licenses for 1873,
S43C, ,785 95 more than the auditor ac-
counted for in his annual report for that |
year. He also testifies to the fact that |
the auditor retained money in his pos
session ninety days before paying
it into the treasury. Exhibit l.
is the testimony OF L. Guichard,
who also figures up large discrepancy
between sums paid by collectors and re-
ceipts reported by the auditors exhibit.
A statement Of Theodore Lepshitz
shows that the auditor paid eighteen
clerks of committees of the house more
than the law allows; he also shows that
the difference between the accounts of
the house committee on contingent ex-
penses and the auditors warrants for
the same expenditure is 5000 rs.
CLINTON TO BB!IMPEACHED.
NEW ORLEANS, April 2l.-In the sem
ate after an executive session, a |
Joint resolution impeaching Clinton |
and suspending him from Office, was
called up but the senate adjourned with
out action. Governor Kellogg was on
the floor Of the senate during the after |
noon, as ia stated, in the interest of |
Clinton. Auditor Clinton addressed an
appeal to the house, in which he says:
"1he charges OF fraudulent disburse-
ments Of the public money have been |
freely made by persons whose wishes / |
have not acceded to, and which Irepel as
false and slanderous every one of them"
The auditor then says: "I respectfully |
request and urge that you authorize by |
resolution or otherwise, the president of |
the cotton and merchants exchange to |
appoint an expert, known to the COM |
mercial community as competent, hon.
est and impartial, thus securing a report |
satisfactory to the public and just to |
me-" This appeal had no effect on the |
house.
JUDGE HAWKINS TO BE IAfPEACHED.
The house appointed a committee to
investigate the charges against Judge |
Hawkins, of the superior district court,
with view Of impesching him.