Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1898-11-18

oNhlts
From the Montpelier journal Of Wednesday ]
The few people who could crowd them
selves into the small room adjoining the
auditor office, in which the investigating
committee sat last evening, were RECALLED
with story unprecedented in the history
of Vermont. The examination was con.
Quoted by Chairman y Dung of the senate,
assisted 10y Senator Plat and with the full
joint committee present.
GOV. Grout was the first witness and
read an apologize statement in which he
tried to explain the expenditures which
were authorized by him, with no authority
except precedent, and squarely against the
constitution Gov. Page made very brief
statement as did eX .Secretary Brownel,
and they were followed by Gen Peck. The
testimony of this official disclosed a condi-
ton OF things undreamed Of even by those
who by partial investigation had reason to
fear the worst. He made the worst posi-
bic witness. The most scandalous and
outrageous charges could not be explained
by him of course, and the case was 50 Ut
terly hopeless that he made no serious All
tempt to justify himself. His only excuse
was that 1.-THE governor ordered biternor
"the governor approved Ia Viii lea dissi
tinctly acknowledging thai he knew the
expenses charged TO be- pnwnrrant4blea and
Misunderstanding fact eNPfesaAE tfoEbidden
by the constituti0pA - 80 Bdf.~
1t Waa a NEST shameful exhibition, and
the IegialainfeicanHot hesitate to take &C
tion any longer than until the inevitable re-
port of thecommittee is submitted. lndig-
nation issa mild word to use in expressing
tl1etfeelings of those who heard the testi-
mony, and it will increase as it is generally
known. Following is All abstract of the
evidence:
The Evidence.
BY Mr.. Young:
As TO authority for the expenses of the
governors office.
Governor Grout had written out his
statement, and asked to be allowed to read
it,
With tritiing exception only is any war
rant found in the written law for the eX-
penses of the governor. 1t was contem-
plated that the governor would not have
any expenses, or, if so, he would pay them
himself, or, he could be trusted to use his
judgment. 1t is a part of the unwrtten
law as old as the constitution that COVER
nors have been allowed and have been eX-
pected to use their own best discretion in
this respect. The governor then referred
70 tic STATE LuutN pau OuL " Ilit LIOOps
in the Spanish war, all OF which was as un-
authorized as the Nashville trip. Governor
Page and STATS expenses were 81 .4S0 ~
Governor Fuller and staff, 81, 429. G6, GOV.
ernor Grout and staff, except Nashville
trip, 81 ,06G 20. During my term as COVER
nor | received and disposed of over 1000
letters. In the summer of 81, when Presi-
dent Mckinley and party, were at the
Hotel Champlain General Peck conveyed
to them my compliments by my direction
and also floral Offering to Mrs. Mckinley
from the ladies of Vermont, costing $40
For this | have been paid by certain peo-
pie.
The original conception of the Nashville
trip was that it was not TO exceed an ex-
pense of $500. Many of those of the
party as at first made out could not go,
and others were received in their places
A certain amount had to be guaranteed to
secure low rates. There were three unused
tickets. The party all paid their fares to
New York, as that was the starting point
Rates for staff was SAT from New York.
The full fare for the trip was 500 Full
fare TO" editors was $40 The $50 tickets,
Sl5 was paid in addition by those using
them l did not pay anything whatever
myself for the Nashville trip. Is it not
time that your investigation is directed
more to executive economy in expenses
than anything else?
The governor then gave a statement of
the purposes of the trip 1t was your rep
resentative, not mine 1t was a dignitied
party OF G5 Vermonters Ii was not Gov.
Grout with a gold-laced staff that went to
Nashville. 1t was a party of Vermonters
representing their state. The party re-
ceived marked courtesy everywhere, be-
cause it was your party, not mine. Here
Gov. GrouL read the address of welcome of
Gov. Taylor of Tennessee at Nashville.
This took some time, and had very little
connection with the matters under cOnsid
Grafton.
Ii you say the Nashville trip was more
expensive than it should have been,
agree with you, but it was worth all it cost.
l received over 100 invitations to public
functions during my term, and compelling
a governor TO decide what he ought to do
at the states expense is anything but
kindness on the part of the state.
Question by Mr. Young as to legislation
in 1896 on the subject of the Nashville trip.
Admitted that no authority was given TO
spend money there
Did not the legislature say as emphatic
ally as possible that it would not pay any
expenses at Nashville?
No sir, did not so understand it. ! was
opposed TO an appropriation for the pur-
pose.
| am aware that the constitution prohib-
its the expenditure of money without auth
GRITTY, but it had been done, and done, and
done. The Grant dedication exceeded the
expenses of the Nashville trip. The S6j
tickets covered all necessary expenses.
Do not remember that in 1896 senate
bill was killed in the house authorizing
the national guard to go to New York. The
whole expense of the New York trip was
S2,572 Think it was all authorized
Q After the legislature refused to au-
thOrz- calling the militia outside the state
do you still think you were authorized by
law to take four companies to New York
Ans. Yes sir.
Wasn't the muster of August '97 the
most expensive muster ever heldP
/ don't know,
The expenses of the Washington trip to
the inauguration were then discussed a
tabulated statement of which had already
been printed
Approved Gen. Peck's accounts for stem
ographer and clerk hire, but don't know
as the law permits it. Writing invitations
TO muster, 5000. Approved that, but don't
underst nd much about it. Don't know
that Gen. Peck had any authority to pay
SIS for pictures and frames, but approved
it,
AS to the Old Guard ball, it was custo-
mary for governors of other states to attend,