The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1891-07-17

The PhlLADEl PHlA RING.
ciscunstsnslai Evidences Proves wanna
unsker a. Have lsesn 0ns u Them.
The indefinite suspension Of SEN
tence" In She case Of John Barisley.
the embexzling treasure Of Philadei-
phia. after his plea OF guilty, Is in keep
ing with tho extraordinary impudencc
which has character red the operations
Of the official ring involved In the rob
berry Of the city and Of the keystone
and Spring Garden banls There Is
nothing in the statement made by
Bardslcy 10 break the force Of the evil
dencc which overwhelmed him into his
plea Of guilty. IL y for the most part
an attempt 20 excuIpste the postmaster
general, the assistant secretary Of the
treasury and the comptroller Of the
currency from completely in the Key
stone frauds BY putting the entire OFF,
cial responsibility on the bank exam
liner. who. - Bardsley alleges. was
bribed TO cor ccal the true condition Of
the bank This is the implication Of
the Official theory advanced by Comp
troller Lacey, and the whole signifi-
canoe Of Bardsley's statement is that il
adopts the lines already laid down by
Lacey.
The position which the implicated
federal officials have thus attempted TO
assume Is not tenable. Even If they
prove that Bank Examiner Drew was
bribed II does not relieve Comptroller
Lacey. who undoubtedly knew Of the
condition of the bank. and who kept il
open after he had visited Philadelphia
and personally inspected IL.
Bardsley admits that from Novem-
Der, 1890, he was active in his efforts To
keep the bank from being closed in
compliance with the natio al banking
law. and he claims that his sole con-
nection with the postmastcr-genera in
the affair was in writing him letter
to secure his cooperation in naming
the receiver. The circumstantial evil
dencc indicates that Mr. Wanamaher
was not less active in doing everything
possible to prevent the execution ofthe
law requiring the closing of the bank
And at this point there is serious dis
crepancy between the statement of
Bardsley and that of Wanamaker The
former claims to have lost all the
money he embezzled from the city in
the bank failure. Though as long ago
as last November. according TO mis-
story. he failed in his attempts to with
draw his deposits. il appears that Mr..
Wanamalxer was more favored, for be-
ginning in December, after Bardslcy
had failes. in Novembe he continued
withdrawing his firms deposits from
the bank until March, 1891. when. hav-
ing withdrawn everything, the bank
was closed by the comptroller's orders.
Compare with the admissions of Wanna
maker this from the statement Of
Bardsley:
Continuing. Mr.. Bardslcy said: About NJ
vember I. 1870. notined the bank that on No
vember g. $500. would have 10 call on them
for 100000 to pay the state treasurer on No
vember g. was not able 10 collect the 400.
600 nor any part thereof nor have been able
since 10 collect any part Of the ee2s0O The
entire amount = still IN the bank, or should be
there
This fixes November 26 as the date
beyond which Bardsley alleges that he
was unable TO withdraw his deposits.
yet IL appears from Wanamal<er's state
ment that il was only about this time
that his ordinary business prudence"
prompted him to begin his successful
attempt to withdraw. keeping the bank
open in the meantime for the receipt Of
deposits from the uniformed public.
There Is too much back OF all this to
allow the success Of the strenuous cf-
n 49, -..1
Bardsley's accomplices may purchase
his silence at the price OF prostituting
the courts to keep him out of the peni-
tertiary after his plea Of guilty. but
when congress meets its first duty will
be TO take steps TO uncover everything
that has been done by the Philadelphia
ring as far as it concerns the wrecking
of the keystone and the official con-
duct Of federal ofiiceholdcrs st.
Louis Republic