The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1876-02-08

! ira labor. Look through his reports and
mark the amounts paid for extra clerk
labor in his Office. We're these sums paid
by the Auditor out Of these retaliatory
fees from the insurance business, which
had burdened him with the necessity for
80 much extra clerical assistance? Not "a
bit Of il. They were paid out Of the
treasury OF the State. lie was not re-
quired to perform any extra labor,
never did perform any, and yet he put
all that tax in his own pockets. The
gentleman who framed the retaliatory law
was before linn and he would appeal 10
him 10 say il the intent Of that law,
was that other States should impose bur-
dens upon our people in order that We
might retaliate upon them by making
fat fees for the Auditor. The argument
that the Auditor had misinterpreted the
law was without force, for upon the same
plea all our prison doors would be thrown
wide open. The respondent must show
by evidence that he did not understand
the law. 1t was the easiest matter in the
world for him to have informed himself
upon the law. The Governor or the At
torney General could have told him
whether the law required him to make
these reports. He did not seek the in
formation at the proper time, and now
the counsel from Marion assumes that
his dictum is authority good enough for
the Senate. Well, his (the Manager's)
dictum was ms good as that Of the gentle.
man from Marion, and he affirmed that
the Auditor did not misinterprcte The
law. 1t was law too plain TO be misin-
terpreted. He would let the Senate judge
between his dictum and that Of the gen.
tleman from Marion.
The counsel for the respondent had
lauded his integrity; they even desired
to bring him in and set him before the
Senate that they might look upon his
honest face. Yes il they had brought
him in, the Senate would have looked upon
face marked by the shrewd cunning OF
a sharper; u man skilled in covering up
villainy. As between the Treasurer and
the Auditor, the latter ia the more guilty.
The little document procured from the
Attorney General, procured on the eve OF
an investigation, was trick to cover up
his tracks. The Attorney, taking the
New Jersey law and the Auditors rcp-c.
sentation OF his official acts, without in
vestigation OF either, said he thought the
fees belonged to the Auditor. II there
has been any legal Interpretation OF that
New Jersey law why has it not been pro.
duced? We answer simply because, il
correctly considered and interpreted, 1t
initiates against the Auditor. That
opinion OF the Attorney General was got
ten up TO order by the astute official
whom the counsel have set up for your
admiration us standard OF morality.
That opinion, given under the circum-
stances and for the purpose that it was,
was beneath the dignity OF an Attorney
General with Gubcrnatorial aspirations.
It was a blot upon the State and ought to
be apOlogized for.
The general scheme OF our law was
against Increasing the fees OF the Auditor.
According to his own reports there were
more than forty foreign insurance COM
panies doing business in this State, and
yet they had been able to show less than
one.ffth OF the fees paid. There was no
record. All the enormous fees paid by
those companies went into the Auditors
pocket, but he had left no trace OF the
amounts. The opinion Of the Attorney
General was only obtained in order to
cover up fraud. Allowing the Auditors
pretended understanding Of the law to be
correct, the Office would pay better than
the Presidency OF the United States, even
after the salary grab was passed.
Nnnn rncCls