The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1876-03-30

also the Hon. F. l.. Cardozo, the State
treasurer. BY reference to the testimony
of Dir. Solomon, it will be found that the
State treasurer is charged with having
been engaged in acts not only officially
irregular, but -
CRIMINALLY DISHONEST AND CORRUPT.
1t seems to be an undisputed fact that
large amount of the claims ofthe bank
embraced in the printed schedule have
been paid out of other levies, and still
larger amount of other State paper sub
stituted end paid by the treasurer out of.
the levy for the claims of the bank, in
direct violation Of the express provisions
of the act, which required that the pro-
ceeds of each levy should be kept.by the
State treasurer seperate and apart from
each other, and. "be-applied for the pur-
poses for which they are respectively
levied and none other" and also provided
that any violations of the provisions of
the act should be a felony. According to
the testimony of Comptroller General.
Dunn, these two transactions aggregated
as much as $4,000. 1t will be observed
from Mr.. Cardozo's testimony that even
he does not deny the fact efithe payment
of some of the bank claims out of. other
levies and the. substitution of outside
claims in their place, to be paid out of
the levy to pay the claims of the bank,
and so paid but that he attempts to JUS
tify his conduct, on the ground, that he
had no knowledge of the existence of the
"printed schedule" and was without data
to determine the identity of the claims.
Even if this would be an excuse if itwere
true, it seems impossible that it can, be,
true, when it, is borne in. mind that, the
schedule accompanied, the report of the
Senate finance committee, was printed
and laid ON the desks of members, and is
found published in FULL the'reports and
resolutions, .187S-74, pages, ao96-lO9S:
It will also be observed that: while Mr..
Cardozo says that he never heard of the
schedule "nntil recently" he is directly
contradicted by. Mr.. Minton; his clerk,
who states that its existence was not only
known to himself at the time of the pas
sage of the claim, but that he called the
treasurer's attention to it at the time the
claims were being paid in January and
February, 1874. Viewed in any light,
the treasurer is either party in interest
or q dupe to nefarious transaction by
which the State has lost many thousand
dollars. .an 'f.rp' ..';f!.
BOARD OF DEPOSIT.
In reference 10 the action Of the board
of deposit in, increasing the amount of
State funds deposited in the bank, the.
committe find that the resolution is pre-
dicted upon misconception of the
amount Of the increase; for, instead of
the increase being from "a comparatively
small sum to a very large one" there was
$4,000 on deposit in April, 1875, when
the action of the board was taken, 50 that
the actual authorizedincrease was S37 ,O00.
There is nothing in the factsr discovered.
which necessarily shows that the board,
or any other member thereof. had any
knowledge of the instability of the bank,
or its censurable for not having deter
mined its true condition. In the light of.
subsequent events, it would have been
better if scrutiny had been instituted
into the standing of the bank; but no
facts had at that time been developed
which would fairly prove the absence of
such investigation to have been culpable.
~ The committee have been attended in
their labors by Gen. John B. Dennis, in
the capacity of clerk, and. desire to ex-
press their sense of the faithful and salts!
factory. manner in which he has dis
charged his onerous and responsible du-
ties. ar:. -
, The committee herewith submit the
testimony of the Witnesses and'the tabular
statements prepared by Mr.. Sawyer .
All of which is respectfully submitted
B. N. WARD,
--.' i'e+ - d. R. DUNCAN, :.
g.'.' On the part of tie Senate.
..,,..-.-s-.,, E. NJ. M..BRAYToN, 3
.... J. A. BARKER, %
On the part of the House.