The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1875-03-20

peaohment. It there are such grounds,
the officer must be impeaohed. Where
conscious guilt Is alleged in reference
to public duty, it comes under the
head OF criminal offences. the mode of
punishing which WAS we'll defined.
No one can suppose the Treasurer
could defrau1 the State of perhaps
million Of dollars. we'll knowing what
he was doing, and not render himself
liable to impeachment. He referred
to Blackstone as of the highest autho-
rity in the discussion of elementary
principles, and quoted from his writ.
ings passage which exactly fitted this
case, to the effec. that mal-administra-
tioh of officers in high trust and em.
ployment is one Of the first and princi-
pal misdemeanors. and punishable only
by parliamentary impeachment II the
Treasurer did what the first speoifca.
ton of the fret charge alleges, he
was guilty of high misdemeanor.
And yet the address carefully abstains
from charging against him any crimi-
nal intent, and does not require a
verdict either that he is guilty or not
guilty. It is asked that he be re-
moved simply on want Of confidence.
This phrase which has no application
to the case, and belongs only to the
British Parliament. 1t pertains to the
removal OF the ministers. who have no
term OF Office. and 60 out OF their own
accord when beaten on test question
or leading measure. Such proceed
ing, If imported here and misapplied,
might work serious mischief in times
n r.
be used to strike down an able and in
dependent Jndge. and be the means
by which the brightest jewel in the
crown might be trRmpled under foot.
Mr.. Porter concluded this division of
his speeoh by laying down the proposi-
tion. that whoever. votes for the address
votes. for all the oharges and all the
specifications contained in it; he votes
that the Treasurer committed frauds,
we'll knowing what he was doing,
although he has already voted that no
criminal intent was entertained by him
in 80 doing. Mr.. Porter next showed
the character of the Office which the
Treasurer holds. It is administrative
or ministerial. He is bound to obey and
execute the law. more especially where
the rights of third parties arc involved.
An Act Of the General Assembly en-
braces in itself the supreme legislative
and executive authority. The duty it
imposes can only be got round by its
being repealed by joint resolution of
the houses, approved by the Governor,
or by Injunction of the court OF Com
mon Pleas. Neither had been done.
An injunction had been sought of the
Attorney. General, but had been re-
fused. because similar objections had
been set at rest by the Supreme Court
of the State and of the United States.
The Treasurer had no option but to
obey the law, and it would be q mon.
strosity to convict him for it. Mr..
Porter held that the ACT to reduce the
volume of the debt, was an offer on the
part of the State to holders of it's
bonds, to consolidate them at fifty
cents on the dollar, which, accepted,
became contract. Every suoh holder
was in position Of having made such
contract. and could enforce it.
Nothing was excluded from the ACT
but the fraudulent conversion bonds.
Whatever is not excluded is included.
The hypothecation bonds were 80 in
oladed- This the Legislature know
full we'll. when it passed the funding
Act. They placed heavy penalties OF
fines and imprisonment on whoever
would refuse to discharge any duty de-
volving on him in connection with it :.
The Treasurer was preoluded from ex-
ercisipg his own judgment, if he had
desired Cr chosen to do it. e.
We find that we cannot follow the
speaker in ell the points lie mada.
He discussed the funding bill at some
length, maintaining that it was the
best thing for the State that could
have been done, although it worked
injustice particularly to the owners of
the old bonds. He referred to the inte.
rest account OF the period from 1869
to 1871, and read statement of Mr..
G. NJ. Walker that, upon examination
in the Treasnrer's Office, he had found
a balance of interest unpaid in those
years Of $6l7,92 Finally, he said
that he would not stand here to defend
the Treasurer. if he thought that there
was any tains of fraud, or anything
wrong in what he had done. He be.
lieved that he had done we'll, done his
duty, and deserved thanks for it. In
behalf OF the Treasurer, he stated fur.
ther, that he bad not intended any
disrespect in anything he had said or
written. He earnestly hoped that tho