Birmingham state herald., 1897-06-01
THAT RANDOLPH COMPROMISE.

general. Gov. Jones, a s Is his custom, de- votes about a half column telling what he is now doing and is going to do, before reaching the milk in the coeoanut, all of which is reproduced. Whzther the ex- governor finds time to read this or his own production, the public can read and judge for themselves as to tn merits and demeTbs.
 The main point at issue hinges on the proposition se. out by the board of com promise in that "the auditor of the state ger. flied Rando1ph's shortage to the gov ernor Of the state, to-wit: the 9th day of November, 1894 This and othir facts tended strongly and persuasively to show to the board tha. if prompt measures had been taken by uhe slate officials that fur ther dcfalcaticn beyond the sum of $6,5OO as to which Randolph was already short, .ght TO. have occurred
 In answer to the above Gov Jones in his interview says:
 "The chief bondsman and his son were both conferred with by me before l went orE of office, and they concurred in the belief that 1t was best for them and the public interest that some time should be given the defaulting judge to pay up the S6 GOO end cdd dollars, of which Auditor Purifoy made official rpon. to me some three CT four weeks beofre Gov. Oates was inaugurated."
 |. might net be out of place to stop the quotation here and ask whal. the O her two bondsmen had to say? Also, was it in the province of the governor when he had been officially notified that Randolph was a 6efaulter to have grant, ed further time without first having made a thorough examina tion to see If there Wer. net ether screws loose in the judges cash till? And after having been informed officially that Randolph was a defaufter, was it in the dlscre.lon of the governor to have e1q. erded his time in ord # that he might make good the short age? Is 1t the pnactlee when bank cash iers or .d hers who handle the peoples money default to the amoun, of six or eight thousand dollars, when panic is on,s that they are allowed to hold their positions in ordi1r to make good the de- fault? If thus allowed does the investi- gation stop short of thorough examina- ton of the books and accounts?
 But the governor further says:
 ''Norpe of us knew or believed that the shor age was due To any pecuniary dls- honesty; and though we kn- w the habits of the fudge, we then DelleVeu CndI pHe deficiency was due to indulgence Tor license moneys during the hard year or the panic and the year preceding and loose bookkeeping"
 | Let's see about this: Was there no way by which the governor could have fourld out after having been officially notified of the default whether it was the result of ''dishonesty," ''the panic" or ''loose bookkeep1ng?" What is he duly of the state examiner under such trying circumstances? Is his mission to call the righteous and not sinners to repentance2 Of course, it is moi supposed that fhe governor could ''know without investl- gaIt.on of the real merits of the case, but as the good lawyer he is, he must admit | it is what the witness knows" and not what he "beEieves" that is taken in evidence. To have believed" in the le- gal vernacular of the jury in this case, would be circumstantlal, but to have Known, a literal fac.
 And again says the governor:
 .,It was the desire of the chief bonds man then that an opportunity be given the judge to get up the money, which could be done in the use of future fees of the office to secure those who might ad- vance the money. It was believed that impeachment proceedings then would in- sure certain loss to the bondsmen and the state by causing the loss of the office ard the opportunity by earning fees to replace the shortage; and the bondsman who would have had the brunt to bear was anxious the time be extended
 From the compromise there appears to be no "chief'' among them, if so no distinction was made for this high office as the amount was placed at $4000 each | And even if the chief had been de- | sirous that such an opportunity be given | would it not have been right to have con 1 suited the other two bucks" and the | little "picaninnies" and widowed | "squaws,' to carry out the tribe name, who were also interested, to say nothing | of the governmental loss? Is it law to l retain a dcfaulter in office in order to allow him the opportunity to make good 1 his default?
 The governor further says:
 q knew that friends of the bondsmen called on Gov. Oates to induce him to | ask me to forego the order of impeach- ment which it was known would be is sued before my retirement; and to induce him to grant more time. The bondsmen certainly knew that had given the judge until Dec. 1 to make good his account; and it is passing strange when papers hostile to Gov. Oates had commented
 
 men did not know what Gov. Oates had done in the matter. or if they were op- posed to giving the time, or wanted the judge impeached, that they did not indi- cate 1t in some way. The anxiety of two executives to take no step which would imperil the interests of the public or the bondsmen, and of which the bondsmen were cognizant and approved, cannot be set up in any court of law or conscience, as wrongs on the part of the state, which should relieve the bondsmen. The at tempt to put the compromise on such grounds, in view of easily known facts, is not creditable to the good judgment of the governor or his associates"
 The foregoing was previously given by both Cows. Jones and Oates in letters to the press, and furnished the basis of ar raignment by the press and the people as to their right in the premises to keep in office a man who they knew was a de- faulter. Because men become sureties to guarantee the state against loss through ic ;obt hot