Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1884-01-04
The Investigating Committee.

Your article of last week ''The investga-
ton and the Report does such manifest inJus-
tice to the Committee, that must ask rs a mat
ter of simple justice, that you permit mem
Der of that Committee to say word IN It's be
half. | am unwilling to believe that you Mr.
Editor would intentionally misrrpresent any
action of that Committee yet must say that
some OF your statements are well calculated to
create grave doubts on that point. To say that
the report of the Committee was unsatisfactory
and inconclusive, '.evtn within the limited
scope TO which the Committee limited It's inreS-
legation is attempting to make an erroneous
impression on the public mind, hen you we'll
know that the Committee was limited 10 the
investigation of the books and accounts Of one
year only, by the written order OF Judge Stone
creating that Committee and defining It's du-
ties, and that this order was passed in Compli-
auce with the request of the grand jury, there
fore the Committee had nothing whatever TO
do with this limitation. and whatever blame
there may be in consequence thereof certainly
does not attach to the Committee. Again at
ter referring to that portion OF the report which
states that the Committee confined in Ills
investg alton of the books and accounts OF one
year, viz from the first day of July 1852 TO
the first day of July lsS3, you SAY, and Yet
We find them in The body OF The report which
follows referring indisrriminalely and in con-
fused manner to expenditures ma e III The us
cal lehl 1891 and prior 10 July loe2 about
which there has never been an! question and
which have no hearing whatever upon the eN-
pendirureS made in the reri"d they claimed 10
have INVESTIGATED. This affords conclusive
proof OF The fact that those well menning gen
temen " no undertook unaSSiSted (though an
thorlZed 10 employ an eAperl) to make The tN-
animation OF the oth,ia, papers Of The County
Commissioners did not properly comprehend
/ the task that VAS before them, and further that
/ in the examination OF The vouchers that were
exhibited to them they failed TO pay any proper
attention To the dates oil the sane.
! Now Mr. Editor these Statements are in the
main obviously THRUST and untrue, ltlrg a.
perceive merely deductions tIom process OF
reasoning apparently peculiar to yourself esPe-
sidlly so IS The halter portion, Which could have
been deduc'd from nothing but The mereSt So
phiSlry. Every voucher eXhItit d to the Com
mtite Was tarttull, scIuttnzed and The date
accurately noted. your Logical? statement TO
the contrary notwithstanding.
] As the author of ''Ihe body % the report
| am painfully aware that il Was not we'll pre-
pared being il Is simple JolIing down Of
the several i'ems Iherein Containtd as they
came before aud were acted upon hy the Com
mittee. 1t VAS intended Tor the Grand jury
alone and its author never expected 10 sre 1t
placed before The puhfic hut The Grand Jury
thong ht d irVeully and as there Was Then no
lime for lis revision We have II in us present
Shap-, therefore admit hat he '.bods OF the
REPORT Is Sumew hal confused but not 50 much
SO that ANY CaIeIu, reader OF oriIu ~ tntell-
geuce cannot understand II unless II lie some
captiuGs Individual "ho docs not "aut 10. 1t
is true that The report does frequently ;et-v TO
"txpel dIluTtS mnde Ia the fiscal yrrr lsSl and
prior to Jul, lss2 and 1t Is also true that rye
~ such reference does have It's betting upon he
expenditures made within The time Il The III
vestigatlon, eiJhel As hgutr, lnitnd"r 10 r!u-
cdaie sume point when mik hi not Ulherw ise
be readily UNDERSTOOD hl The G-aud Jury, or
Itsus OF expenditures cut 81 Ihr levy Vt
lss2 to liquId,lr ouiI- hlIous previously incur
red.
3 1t i. perhaps unu,c ,>>ary Ia remind YOU for
a. "a lawyer you Ought 10 >Hu"H That uueirr our
present Il, H. ~ ~ i,NS IL C,>>aTtIN con
>l,l> uf two tart>. Ius hast ut h,cl consists Of
certain T. t Wed :"T jnr Pu !. ct !tU5d
atIug debts already isrtTr' Il aust watch ~" found
IN the l.Sy Il l>>1 a. l,' Sr.a.y ~. un,zt atd
in exact Inquiries. And toe second consists al
such amounts a. ar required log !ntuuFv par
Ist>.> necessarily IrNIru las advance, aud which
found ia the >hn'- lNy t. IN. stated 10 approx
inat" ruuud hLfnisT> i"">Cefia3u u TIE ~ t"l'
l'N! 81 l>>2 he'd been properly accounted tot II
wss> necessary to "Aaiittn" t4'sa' - t"Tat- and
inciud" the ~iuI' IN Our >tat' Itiv! Z ia the pub
Ac;.ton al which nulscr Nuu ~rrr pis a>.-t Ia
place s>l.rsh> to th'r>s amounts already due at
lnt. time. the levy i>tgut>l them the
several amounts To- ntCuue due thereafter. and
Tor which thanh YOU. a. hay" no d"uhI tary
Will assist you L. - the Crrur into witch you
Ne> Mr. Editor / have IA = ri,-gt r,c,,l,s ton
of the conversation rei-rr,, Ia Ia the carly part
OF your article. tut must insist That S"u arr
AGAIN mistaken "a LAY '- i'i'' a'snt''i A"n 81
the purpu-. al the committee tn publish "a i3>t Of
The vouchers sc. ! sad 10 yr,u thai. that MAS
my idea at proper cUuT>' aud lullS agreed "a lili
YOU IN the matter. but after mature d"Iiu-rAtIuu
. CoGirrring with the Btbtr ur Inbsr> ui The vum-
nittct and taking I.gIli advice, IN common
u
mart Ui our duty Ia supply &" the public details
which the commissioners may have failed Ia
furnish Ia ie published in tlI. columns uf the
lines or ct~s-w herr.
+ The investigating committee WAS appointed
for Performance of - certain duty, which u A. >..I
forth IN The authority under which II acted, and
the committee addressed itt s~>id uou~iy la its
pruI-r duty. which / sin no' hesitate +" LAY was
well and fully ps'rioI med.
{ The committee cumI~>-d a>ii was of III, mlcrS
uf the Grand Jury, appointed 10y TIA" Court al
. the request OF the Grand Jury. To- investigate
matters which had been represented Ia that
booty ~ requiring Investigation. wen. act lated
by the same motives and governed by the same
rules the Grand jury would have hsrn had
that body ~ such MAKE the invest gate and
( this committee could not ~ reasonably "NI.-ct
ed Ia do more than the Grand Jury would haN"
done under the same circumstances. No" MI
Editor you why the committee" held what
you are pleased SaTra>ttcally {" call star Cham
/ Der session. Grand Jurio> arr Required {" TX
anime all charges u offences Of the stat" and II
no reasonable grounds can hr found upon which
Il, has. "A ptcss.utgui indIri msIit the charges
fall and the /. dismissed. ~ IL might have
been with this committee and you would have
had r,.tire>s. IL should br borne la mind that
Grand Juri.> not political machines nor WAS
uial c'mihltt't- w hat" 'S ihN'>'tAItloh
and reported what Z. found to the Grand jury.
who immediately adopted the committee r.
port and from that moment that paper was no
longer the report al the ComInlii""r but nf the
Grand jury. II VIII examine that report
you Will ste that after stating I" the Grand jury
what they had found aud how they found IT, the
r. port says:
/ but a. This testimony which was satisfactory
( To- the minds pf your committee might not reach
! the standard Of certainty required 10y you honor
able body II i here st forth ~ that TIA" grounds
oil YOUR committees convictions HAY b, made
known and thereby enables your honorable
body take such further action In the premises
7 a. In Your judgment may srem proper. After
discussing the matter the Grand Jury thought
no farther action was necessary ana adopted the
report.
| a. defending the county commissioners in this
article ON the contrary saw things OF which
| do not approve and could not endorse but
these were matters OF policy and acts of "a Judlc-
nj character there was not the slightest possible
/ ity of forming or sustaining an Indictment -
| that Grand Jurors they Were entirely out OF
our 7, ach. am free To admit that the investiga
ton rot according To my idea of what II
should have be- II. The limiting of the investiga-
ton to the books and accounts of one year was
think "A mistake a. II was Impossible under such
circumstances for any committee Ia make such
an investigation would he thoroughly salts
factOryand absolutely convincing. But do maiu-
tain that the Investigation WAS ~ thorough,
comprehensive and exhaustive ~ could have
been made by any committee, expert or not,
under existing circumstances, and that the
duties of the committee were faithfully. Efficient
~ and conscienciousy performed. may have
something more to say on this subject anon.
JAS. \. FRASKLIN.
4