New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-07-16
80 l6 1875

supposed that was all on the market, and
! that they should be funded didn't see the
vouchers before the board; can not swear
! whether they were there or not: vent
to the Auditors Office myself to
iooh at them, because had a
claim against the State outstanding; one of
the clerks showed them them to me some
time after the funding; received the war
rants Immediately after the vote; thought
at first il was Mr.. Mooney who brought
! them. but as lie says he didn't don't know
who it was; think it was Mr.. Mooney, but
may be mistaken; it was not Mr.. Clinton;
can not swear who It was, though still have
tho Impression it was Mr.. Mooney; che var
rants were brought the same day; the ses-
sion was about an hour; don't know Who
sent for the Assistant Attorney General; q
boy went for him: can't tell how long the
board waited; he was sent for the day be-
fore; ehe discussion lasted two days; he
came the day the warrants were funded; he
was asked to come the day before don't
know that he gave . written opinion to the
board; there were ne warrants or vouchers
for him to give an opinion Oh; hs expressed
his opinion Oh the subject matter; don't
know that his opinion was = speech or not
the meeting was an adjourned one, and the
Governor had no notice Of that meeting;
don't recoIlect who made the motion to
tand; think the Auditor was presiding; don't
know that he was called to the chair BY
vote; Mr.. Sanford was superintendent. of
the st. Louis Hotel at the time Mr.. Benham
was president Of tho association that
owned it.
A recess Of an hour was here taken. and
Mr.. Drury again resumed the stand, all
parties appearing somewhat refreshed, so
much so that the Attorney General turned
tho witness over to the defense.
Mr.. Drury to Mr.. Semmes-Was clerk Of
tho board in 1874. not in 1875; the discussion
Of tho Sanford application was August 60
and %; the character Of tic vouchers was
discussed; some Of them were said to be
Pinckney Smiths warrants; it was under
stood it was about all, and no member op-
posed the funding Mr.. Dibble was present
ut the last meeting, the twenty ninth; don't
know Colonel Field was in the city; he had
left some days before; the discussion may
have been an hour or an hous and half;
no other business was done; there never
was any objection to the legality Of the
vouchers: the question was only tho one
submitted to Judge Dibble, whether ths
warrants having been made out before the
Injunction was served could be signed
To Colonel Field-Didn't ses the en-.
velopes Of vouchers packages shown himl
at the time in the funding board
Governor kellogg, sworn-Testided that
he was in tho city during 1874, except
during the latter part Of June and frat of
July; remembers whom the appropriation
bill Waa passed
Colonel Field wished 70 show that there
were conversations ON the bill with tho
Governor, Auditor and Attorney General.
Mr.. Semmes objected to any when tho
Auditor was not present.
Governor Kellogg said he could not re-
member any special Conversations, but did
the tact that there were such; some parts of
the bill ought to have been ipjoined. and
being solicitous to have the excess of ap-
preparations over revenues stopped; can't
remember the precise conversations; the
fact is, when the enrolled bill came for ap
probation came to the conclusion that the
whole second section was unconstitutional,
and if approved ought to be injoined the
militia and legislative appropriations were
poOorHoA
have conversed about them with the Audi
tor. because the whole section was
discussed: knew that the Auditor was
going to leave the city; said
would like to have aim temain, that he
would be estopped: presume it was to re-
lieve him from importantly, but there was
no such understanding that the Auditor
should be absent; it is likely ne thought it
was best for him to be away, but there was
nc understanding: he was absent about
week: wanted him back because there were
some meritOrious claims. Supreme Court
judges, etc.. that ought to be settled; during
the time was here: heard nothing from
March to August OF the Benham $l3s, 900;
had no knowledge these vouchers had been
passed by the Auditors chief clerk and
audited. Tread tho proclamation of June
l9, 1871 This was from my office; it was
issued at tho instance Of the Auditor and
the result Of consultation with him; knew
there were fraudulent claims, and was try
ing to avoid them: recollect the act appro-
pristins $95,000 do not know that the
warrants were issued in one night; have
heard 30; remember . man named David
Young, chairman of the Committee on Con
tingent Expenses; don't remember note
from the Attorney General on ths eubiect
Mr.. Semmes objected.
Colone. Field said he wished TO prove the
whole force Of the Auditor was used to
issue these warrants in one night.
Mr.. Semmes said-Suppose it were true-- |
and he was instructed to deny it-vhat Of
feet would it haves
Judge Braughn said ne could not admit |
tho testimony. That . conversation with !
David loung had nothing to do With the !
charge.
Mr.. Vo0rhies said he had 40 desire to |
prevent the investigation, but 20 rule out |
hearsay evidence.
The question was ruled ou.
Governor Kellogg, continuing, said tho
Attorney General was present in the city
during the year up to the sixteenth or
eighteenth of August; am president of
the funding board; first heard of the fund.
ing of the $l38, 900 about the last of Septem
ber; heard of it by asking the Auditor how
many bonds and warrants were funded,