The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1885-10-15
Blair's Reply to barton.
RICHMOND. VA. S.pt. % /

RICHMOND, VA, Sept. D, 1885.
To the Editor Of the Dispatch;
In your issue of the 10th instant / find
a letter from r. T. Barton, in which he
sees fit to give a review of the late inves-
LEGATION Ivy the Democratic Legislature,
through one Of it's committees, of fees
paid me as Attorneys General by the Audi
tor Of Public Accounts, in which he crit
icises both Judge Fauntleroy, and tie
Court of Appeals, and myself.
Its due to the public that 1 should ex-
pose tie animus Of Barton S letter. which
shall now proceed to do. This man Par
ton was one of the two Democratic COM
mitteemen appointed by the Democratic
Speaker, Mr. Stuart, to Investigate the
legality Of fees received by me as Attorney
General. Barton proved fit instrument
for such mean partizan service. During
the sessions Of the committee, which was
composed Of two Democrats and one Re
publican, Barton played the double role
Of bitter prosecutor as well as judge, and
his whole conduct was characterized by
the meanest and most malicious parti-
zanry. He actually sought, time and
! again, as the records win Show, to prevent
me from introducing witnesses and testi-
mony that assured the committee would
exonerate ne from every imputation of
blame, and the record will show num-
Der of my protests in writing against bis
petty and unjustinable interference. His
majority report was unsustaned by any
evidence taken in the case, and was d dis
| tortion of both the law and facts. His
report was SO completely Cnsustained by
proof that his own party, with two-thirds
majority, refused to adopt it, and the
Legislature adjourned SINE die, thus letting
his report go for naught. There was q
minority report that fully exonerated me
| from all blame The ihsinuation of Bar
ton that [ wrote the minority report is
absolutely false. did not write a line or
! syllable Of the said report. furnished a
copy OF the testimony to the Republican
committeeman-M Bishop-and he, with
the assistance of Hon. 2. w. HUBBARD. pre-
pared the minority report. Mr.. HUBBARD
aided Mr.. Bishop, at his request, in for
mulsting the report.
The statement of Barton that the ques-
ton Of the legality Of the fees was not
tried by the court is equally untrue. /
applied for a neaadamus against the Audi
tor to compel him to pay my salary. To
this rule the Auditor made his return that
1 had been improperly paid SAFEST, the
exact amount referred to by Barton in his
letter. and composed Of the same items
referred TO by him. Ny attorneys-Gen-
eral James G. Field and Colonel John FL.
Guy-not only demurred to this return as
insufficient in law, but l made replication
that there was 10 Indebtedness on my
part to the State, and | justified the pay
ment of every dollar Of fees to me by the
Auditor. filed as exhibits and parts Of
my replication Barton's report, which
claimed an Indebtedness against me for
fees, mileage, stationery, &C., as also the
minority report; and from pages 2 and 8
i of the opinion of majority of the court
it will be seen that it was upon these plead
a1sgs ind facts that the court decided in my
favor i repeat that the pleadings were
these, as shown by the opinion itseIs-to.
wit the petition for naaddmus, the rule,
the Auditors return claiming an indebt-