The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1875-03-09

He did not do so. aud this must be re-.
gerded as great and ouIpable neglect
OF duty, evinoing great disregard
OF the public interest Or gross ignor.
ance. Shall IL be said that any State
officer shall undertake to redeem these
bonds, without making single in.
quiry? He stood appalled, at the pros
poets Of the State finances, if such
things could be done unrebuked. It
was gross neglect OF duty, aud tue
Treasurer hns furnished no evidence
that the fault has been rectiGed, or
that be has any information as to how
the persons who presented these bonds
came in possession OF them. 1t was
true, that when they were presented.
il the party presenting them had
proved that ho purchased them, or
that he was un innocent holder. thoy
should have been funded; but not. ut
least. until the title had been proved
II $500, 0000 of these bonds may be
takon in this way. tho entire 81, 600, 600
might be tuken, apd the consolidated
debt of the Stase increased $500, 900,
IN addition to the $3.50. 900 for which
the bonds were pledged. If tho bonds
were still the properly of those who
advanced the money to tho State when
tho contract was made-and there was
no evidence that they were not-bn.h
demands are still standing. The mere
statement was sufficient to satisfy him
that there wss gross neglect, il not IA
gross violation of duty ON the part Of
the Treasurer. In addition to this, there
had been presented for funding ovor
$500. 600 of detached conpous. some OF
which belonged to these very bonds.
When these coupons were presented
to the Stale Treasurer. was there
not still more occasion for the exercise
OF the utmost vigilanoe on his part?
This he regarded as still more con.
splcuous, inexplicnble and inoonceivn.
Die neglect Of dusy-that yearly $500.
0oO Of coupons should have been
presented and funded without any in
formation as to whether they had been
previously paid or not Tie defence
was that there were 1882, 900 of out
standing coupons against tho State
coupons which had not been paid. In
reply to this the report Of the commit
tee shows that the amount of interest
paid during the time in question, by
kimpton and Parker, was more than
S4O0. 600. more than the amount stated
by the Treasurer. It had been con.
tended that the committee report was
based upon the estimates made by the
Comptroller General. So much til.
worse for the Treasurer. Al to that
portion of the report which charged a
division Of the interest fund BY the
treasurer he entirely agreed with it,
Ihe law becomes uuiiitv il any Of
licer OF the State Government NAV
construe it according to his judgment.
and, departing from the strict con.
structlon. confound the various funds.
It seemed to be regarded by some as
an almost irreligious act to question
the oundnct Of any high official. Whom
the State Treasurer was summoned be-
fore the bar Of the House to give an
account of his fidelity and the honest
administration Of tue affAirs OF the
State, was be in any worse condition
than members would be when they
were called upon by the people to give
on account of their stewardsh,p? Th.
eyes OF the whole world wore onacen.
trated upon this State. in the effort to
redeem it from that system of corrup-
ton. fraud and robbery which had
prevailed for tho past six years. The
dominant party of the nation had su ~
moned the Republicans OF the State to
put their house in order, and to reform
the errors and abuses of the Haet.
Shall we defend ourselves by saying
that IN this case the officer stands too
high? Wonld that be an adequate de-
ience? No, sir; we stsnd here to do
our duty. and, no matter who the man
may be. let Us do it without pity, with.
out love and without fear. The higher
and more shining the mark, the
greater honor. the greater service will
We have rendered the public morals
by oondemning him il he be guilty.
LOUISVILLE COURIER JoURNALIsMs.
Grant is wiser and sadder man TO.