The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1876-02-05

~ 2 aG
quest Of the State, where, will you tell me,
is the defense OF the people? The ami.
mus Of theft remains though by after
thought clothed with the semblance OF
rightful authority. "a
Precedent is eloquent, and ifin this case
after having with unblushing defiance
confessed the acts herein charged, the res
pondent be acquitted the precedent will
be one Of danger.
But yesterday, as it were, this High
Court had said, we will. have purity in
the Administrations OF public affairs; there
small be no taint Of official corruption.
II man has been guilty Of crime, wheth-
er as private citizen or as an official,
which he has been able for season to
hide from the public eye, shall he sit in
the high place OF honor and mock the
people, mock the courts OF justice, when
the veil has been torn away and the man
stands ont in the light Of his true char.
acter2 And yet the counsel for the re-
spondent will tell this court that il may
not remove man for oflenses committed
in prior term Of Office. itis danger
GUS position, which, Il adopted by the Sen
ate, will more than any other tend 10 sap
the very foundations OF representative
government. The Barnard case has de-
cided that for official corruption there is
no statute Of limitation. ga rs-l-=
II is a wise provision OF the constitu-
tion which requires officials to make re-
turn under oath Of the fees received and
Of the manner Of disbursement. The franz
ers OF that instrument, in Difference to the
popular belief that officials, high and low,
were alike receiving too high fees which
were burdenSome upon the people,requir-
ed that all fees from all sources and for
every service should be accounted for in
order that it might be known how much
the Office was paying, and whether or not
the fees might be reduced to the interest
OF the people. II the respondent could
not understand the provisions Of the Con-
stitution without an. opinion from the
Attorney General he oughtto be dismiss
ed from the otiiCefor stupidity. This ap.
plies to fees actually made perquisites OF
the office, and there is no shadow Of pro-
vision in The law indicating that the re-
taliatory tax belonged elsewhere than to
the treasury Of the State.
The Manager then at considerable
length reviewed the insurance laws Of the
various States Is set forth in the blue
book.
AFTERNOON.
Mr.. Blakemore resumed his argument
referring to his remarks before re-
cess on the sube OF insurance laws. |
understand that the counsel for the re.
spondent claim that in his arrangement
with n. B. Cabell, he made it as private
individual. ! say that he did it as public
official. In no other way could he have
knowledge that a certain amount OF
money would be due from the B. 4 o. r.
H. except as m officer. As member Of
the Board OF Public Works il was part
OF his duty to know what moneys were
due, where il is deposited and the rates OF
interest. lie then referred to the law to
show that its construction admits. OF no
Interpretation which will divest the
transaction with n B. Cabell of its official
His removal ofS25, 900 from designated
depository was in direct violation Of law
and resulted in a direct loss to the State.
II is no matter of wonder, when you con-
slider The magnitude Of the oflense, that
the counsel for the respondent were anxi.
ous to strike ont the testimony ot Mr..
CabelI, and that too on mere technicali-
ty which in nowise affected the validity
OF the charges. The Senate, however,
refused TO listen to this demand OF the |
respondents counsel.
In relation to the 9th article, bearing
upon the withdrawal Of the s., 100 from
the First National Bank OF Wheeling. 1t
is claimed that he did this by the author.
Ity and direction oi the Board OF School
Funds. Now the fact is established that
he did it without the direction OF the
Board, without whose authority he vio-
lated the law. This he did too TO
the detriment OF the State, because
he drew il from depository paying 10
the State per cent and put 1t in depos-
itory paying but 2! per cent. Where
is the proof by the respondent
that the State received any in
tercst from this fund up to June,
period OF several months, and il devolvcs
upon the counsel for the respondent to
show that the State did receive any bene-
fiji from the deposit OF this money prcvi-
GUS to the time that it was actually turned
into the Treasury. But enough upon this
article. Upon the 7th article, embracing
the corrupt proposition made 10 Isaac n.
Smith tho. counsel for the defense
maintain that il was Il mere proposition,
and as nothing came OF it it was not an
oiIense. Is II any justification Of the
Auditor that his offer was repelled by
the officers OF the bank. Itwas high
misdemeanor, an attempt to make cor.
rupt bargain. Isaac n. Smith, n man
above reproach or suspicion, swears that
he did make this proposition and he did
do it.
How did he do it? Not by going to
the bank in open day and in the manner
Of man who had nothing but righteous.
ness in his heart, but in secresy he goes
to the private office OF Mr.. Smith and
makes his proposition, and covers it
with cloak OF secresy by charging that
his name should not under any circum-
stances he made known, showing clearly
that the animuS Of his intent was evil
and that he knew in his heart that the
was corrupt proposition.
The plea that the money which he pro-
posed 10 influence was not State funds is
the shcarest technical dodge. II it was
not the States money, whose money was
III It did not belong TO the Sherifis, it
was tho money Of the people, and out Of it
this willy Auditor soughtto mako fund
for the benefit Of himself. As to the
Eighth Article, whatever consolalionthe
may derive from Il, we admit !
that we have not proved it.
Let US now review the testimony, ,
The respondent iustitfes himself upon the
The ground that his fellow officers inter
preted the law in certain, way. No
Of opinion among these Of
icers by which each interpreted the law to
,uit the circumstances surrounding him ,
,elf is OF any weight in his favor. Such
conferences and agreements among Off. !
,ials constitute the very ground work OF
Every officer must stand by
he court Interpretation OF law.
1t is said that the Auditor is sustained 4
40 tho Oniniob NJ tho law officer of the >