Year: 1876

| Icy BANK, ana charged tne Auultor Win
grave misconduct and high misdemeanor
in Office. Counsel gave statement
of the whole transaction, as it has already
been detailed in these columns. He stated
that it was the Auditors duty TO collect
that interest, even though he had not re-
ceived, as he did do, an order
from the Board for him to collect it. He
showed how that officer had labored hard
and long to find out where the money
was, and finally traced il to the First Ma
tional Bank of Wheeling; that a long
correspondence had ensued between the
cashier of that bank and himself, regard
ing the matter. On the 2lst of October,
1872, the Auditor sent power of attor-
ney to SAID bank, and demanded
certificate of deposit of the money.
Yet he had received no certificate
as late as March 2lst 1873. After pro-
tracted session of the Legislature, this
fact was brought to his knowledge, and
he instantly drew on the bank for the
money which he deposited elsewhere.
1t was further alleged that he had no
right as Auditor to draw this money from
one public depository and place it in
another. He had no knowledge that the
money was in the Treasury at all, having
received no certificate Of deposit. Pay
ment into the Treasury was not completed
without such certificate, and even if
the money had been to the credit Of the
State, the Auditor had no means of
knowing it. The bank had collected the
money, not as State depository, but
through power of attorney. 1t was
the Auditors right and duty to collect the
money, and he could not relieve himself
from it without mourning q
grave charge of neglect of duty.
The presumption Of innocence sur
rounded the respondent. He placed The
money in the Kanawha Valley Bank
on the llth of April, 1873. He deposit
ed it as Auditor, and received a certiti-
cate of deposit, and it renamed there
until the 2Sd of June following.


The Managers charged that the per-
hitting it to remain so long in the bank
was through some wrongful and impro-
per motive, and theyhsd dwelte1tensively
upon this po;nt. The testimony had
shown the fact that the Auditor had di-
rected Mr.. Boiling, clerk in his office
to make out statement as to where this
money belengd After this statement
WAS made out, 1t was lost, and could not
be found for long time, In the
mean time the sum had
been collected and deposited. 1t was the
duty of the Court to impute to him
good rather than corrupt motive. There
was nothing to show that the Auditor in
tended to steal the money. When man
intended to steal he did not give publicity
to his intentions. Yet in this case the
Auditor had conferred with the Gov
ernor, the Secretary of State, the sub
Treasury in New York, the First Nation
al Rank of Wheeling, and the officers of
Kanswha Valley Bank. All these knew
what he was after, and therefore it was
utterly impossible for him to have escap-
ed detection. Not even surnise of
guilt could be founded; there was no evil
dence which justified suspicion of guilt.
| The Auditors conduct deserved and re-
ceived the approval of all good citi-
zens who had become acquainted with
the facts.


Mr.. Morrow then proceeded to discuss
the transaction with Mr.. Cabell, Of the
Merchants Bank of Charleston. He
said that the Auditor had done his
duty in making out and sending to the
Baltimore Il Ohio K. X. Go. a statement
of the taxes due by the company. This
was all he did. He never, rs the Mana
ger charged, made any demand for said
taxes, and when the company transmit
ted to him its check for the amount, to
be deposited into the State Treasury, the
Auditor could not properly have declined
the favor. If the company had tele-
| graphed the Auditor to return the mon
ey TO the Office at Baltimore he could
not have decllRed the office. If he
had have absconded with it, the
State would have suffered ne loss
lie was merely the agent of the COM
| pany to make the deposit OF it. and was
not liable on his bond for the money. In
receiving 500 for deposting said sum,
he had violated no law. 1t might be
| that his conduct was little indelicate
He might have properly given the
money thus made 10 the railroad COM
pany, but this was only aquestlon of,pro-
priety.


1t had been urged that the transaction
was done in secret. Prudent business
men always tronsacted their business in
secret. If the President of the company
had made the deposit himself, and recev-
ed 500 for it, it would not have been re-
garded as improper, for such things were
of frequedt occurrence, and not wrong
according to the standard of morality IN
West Virginia or any other State.


1t had been charged that the counse!
had set up the statute of limitations.
They had referred to 1t, but did not rely
on that to clear the respondent. Their
chief reliance was in his innocence.


The seventh article, charging that the
Auditor was guilty Of corruption IN ap-
preaching Mr.. Isaac n. Smith, of the
First National Bank of Charleston, re-
.arding bonus for controlling the
State deposits and securing them in his
bank was next discussed. The counsel
argued that when the Treasurer was ac-
Quilted upon even the more serious
charges of arranging to influence monies
already in the Treasury, the Auditor was
also virtually acquitted of this charge OF
merely suggesting to persons where they
might advantas seousy deposit their
money What was WAS it for him to say
to any one asking bis advice about where
te deposit, Put it in the First Nationals
its officers are very clever gentlemen"
There might i'll this instance also be raised
8 question of delicacy, but surely there
WAS nothing criminal about it. The Audi
tor merely made an inquiry of the bank
officer, which was laid before the Board,
which decided that.s small commission
might be allowed. The proposition was
never accepted by respondent, however,
and there the matter ended. 1t could
not be charged even that he intended to
make an improper arrangement. The
counsel concluded by dwelling upon the
effect of conviction, and said that all
those engaged in this trial would soon
pass away, but the effect of conviction
on such frivolous pretexts, would never