Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-10-14
PITTsBURG. WEDNESDAY, OCT II, 1891
TWELVE PAGES
OCT. Il. lsyl
THE GoyERNoH,s MESSAGE.

The proceedings of the extra session
Yesterday consisted of listening to the
Governors message and its reference to a
Committee of Seven to shape the pro-
cedUrc of the Senate.
Circumstances reverse the order of pro-
cedure provided by the Constitution so
that the case begins by the Governor ad-
dressing the Senate instead of the Senate
addressing the Governor This is per-
iectly Ineligible necessity of the political
complication of affairs; and the Governor
makes it effective in his attack on official
misconduct. The message is somewhat
long: but there is not a word too many in
it. 1t devoteS itself exclusively to the
recital of the disclosures made by the
various investigations into the Philadel-
Plia dctalcations; and diSpassionately sets
the evidences before the Senate for its
action.
The case as made by the Governor in
its bearing on the State administration
divides itself into two chapters. One con-
siSiS of the evidences of the receipt of
money from Bardsley by McCamant and
LivSey as a return for the extraordinary
favOrS shown him. The correlation of the
dates of remittdneeS by Bardsley with the
dates of letters of thanks acknowledging
The receipt of favorS from the two State
officials, will not permit the public mind
to accept the idea that the thanks were for
the purchase of necktieS or magazines. In
this regard the Governor makes out a
strong primd fdcis case against the two
officials named; while as to the actual re-
ceipt Of money from the embezZling City
Treasurer, State Treasurer Boyer is not so
far implicated.
As TO the negligence and even willful
violation of the law governing the dis
charge of their duties the case is simply
conclusive. 1t is shown that the fiscal and
fiduciary officers of the State not only al
lowed the money of the State to remain in
Bardsley's hands long past the date for
settlement in plain violation of the law,
but that they actually paid State money
over to him to evade the law requiring its
investment in the sinking fund. This fact
is established by their own admission, and
when placed side by side with the legal
directions furnishes absolute evidence of
official negligence and misconduct The
summary of the proceeding is that the Au-
ditor General and the State Treasurer,
whose duties were exactly opposite, persist
entity left the money in Bardsleys hands to
yield him interest when it should have,
been in the Treasury and part of it in the
sinking fund yielding interest to the State.
That the moneywas finally embezzled only
emphasizes the violation of the law. 1t is
not too much to say that the case thus pre-
sented is one, which, if it occurred in the
affairs of a private firm or corporation,
would call for the summary discharge Of
the clerks or agents who were guilty of
such misconduct
The burden of action is now on the Sen
ate. 1t is not a case where politics can be
permitted to creep in. Indeed, any at
tempt to shirk the fullest action required
would be the worst politics. The prOtec-
ton of the peoples funds and the main
tenance of public integrity depend on
prompt and adequate steps, such as the
case demands.
The Senate will be expected to perform
its duty in this respect. Neither Republi-
can sentiment nor public sentiment will
approve the disposition shown by the Re
publican Senators on the Investigating
Committee to eNOnerate the offending Off
cialS and make the party carry the load.