The Birmingham age-herald., 1913-12-13
MR.. HENDERSON
DEFENDS POSITION
ON NSPO|LSSYSTEM
GubernatOrial Candidate
Replies to Criticism of
Observation-Disclosures
Former Remarks

Montgomery, December 12.-(Spe-
cial )-Charles Henderson, president
of the state railroad commission and a
candidate for governor, issued a strong
statement this afternoon in reply to
recent criticism of his interview on the
'spoils system"
In his statement today Mr.. Hender-
son not only reiterates his former re-
marks on the necessity of having bond
ed officials, but points out that the
defalcation of nearly 100000 from the
state convict department would not
have occurred had the custodians of
that fund been under bond.
Mr. Henderson declares that had the
law providing for bonded officials in
the convict department not been
during the special session OF
the Legislature of 1907 the state would
never nave suffered the heavy loss. The
convict department, declares Mr.. Hen
dersob, receives large sums of money
monthly, ''and 1t Is unreasonable to be-
lieve that any department of state gov
ernment should desire to increase it's
responsibility by the retention of such
large sums of money in it's hands for
three months unless it Injured to the
benefit of someone"
Referrin gto the custom which OBJ
tanned during Mr.. Comer's administra-
t1on of keeping large sums of money
in bank for two or three months, Mr..
Henderson says: TT may have been
used to reward friendly individuals or
institutions for past political activities
to secure such favors for the fu-
eure."
HendersOn's Interview
The interview of Mr.. Henderson is as
Nollows -.
II have noticed some exceptions to
my interview of several days since in
which / referred to the spoils system
in Alabama and the dangers confront
ing us from such practices.
THE critics seemNto think that warn
ing was given on a subject that had
not been detrimental to the state and
that no danger was imminent. 1t is only
necessary to refer to the change in the
law during a special session of the leg
islature of 1907, relating to the govern
ment of the convict department and
the result as developed in 1913 where
by it was shown that the state had lost
over 100000, to know that the state
has suffered direct loss from this prao-
tice Without the change in the law,
the subsequent loss would have been
impossible; there was good reason
for the change. The parties who in
vestigated and directed the change of
the laws may not have divided any loot
between them after being carried away
in a suitcase as has been disclaimed
from the platform, but some one profit :
ed in some method, by having the law
changed.
THE convict department receives
large sums monthly running as high
as a quarter of a million dollars quar-
terly and it is unreasonable to believe
that any department of our state gov t.
ernment should desire to increase it's
responsibility by the retention of such
large sums of money In its hands for
three months unless it Injured to the
benefit of someone
The question naturally arises who
secured this benefit during the admin.
1stration when the change in the law
was made permitting the department to
hold this money? 1t may have been
used to reward friendly individuals Or
institutions for past political activities