Year: 1875

!


US but very few Of the points made in an
argument Of such great length.


Tho Judge commenced by narrating
somewhat Of the circumstances under
which the investigation had been inSti-
tuted and carried on; speaking Of the ig-
nominy that the partizan press had en-
deavored to cast upon the committee. 1t
had been characterized as the smelling
committee, but the committee was not
deferred from It's duty and the result Of
its labora was before the House. lie sig
niied his willingness to be interrupted by
any member who might desire informa-
tion, lie then, so to speak, struck the
true inwardness Of the question from the
start. Barely Alluding to the remarks Of
Mr., Ice, who preceded him, he showed
that the tentleman's remarks upon the
delinquencies oiOlticials under former
aud different party administration had
nothing to do with the question in
hand. The House neither condemns
nor aCquits the accused parties. 1t
merely decides whether they shall be
sent to the Senate, the Tribunal provided
by the constitution and the laws Of
the State and upon whose judgment
the accused will be acquitted or con.
demnGd. lie would show the gentlemen
Of the House whether II were wise or
not to throttle this investigation, He
then proceeded to define the word cor
ruption Us loss Of integrity, a departure
from a pure standard, Taking up the
case Of Auditor Bennet, whom he charac-
terized as n smooth, slick fellow, ho
struck out on tho trail Of the B. 4 o.
$4,000 transaction, traced all the ins and
outs from It's deposit in the First Ma.
tional Bank Of Wheeling to It's resting
place In tho vaults Of the Merchants Bank
OF Charleston, by which corrupt arrange.
ment no robbed the State OF the differ.
ence between the rate Of four per cent in.
tercst paid by the former and the rate Of
three per cent paid by the latter in order
that he might put 5000 in his own pocket.
He showed that ut various times Auditor
Bennett had made corrupt proposals by
which the State would lose money and
that in all the transactions between the
banks and the Auditor, the State had lost
money. lie claimed that the acts OF the
Auditor US one Of the guardians Of the
StatoS fiscal interest were such ~ no
private individual or firm would tolerate
for moment.


Judge Stuart then took up the charges
against the Treasurer, showing that in
his frat term Of Office he Ind initiated
corrupt course Of action, which not only
permeated the whole Of that term, but
extended into his secOnd,or present term,
clearly bringing him within the reach
Of the action Of the House, even II the
proposition that he was not answerable
for his corruption during the first term
WIS true. lie showed that there was
now $4,000 Of the State funds locked up
In the Merchants Bank Of Charleston,
upon which tho State could not draw, or
could not get II It did draw, and which
1t Ia not unlikely that the State will lose
entirely. Yet the gentlemen say that
the State has not lost any money. Per.
haps the most pungent portion Of the
gentlemNn's speech was that in which
he considered the circular issued by
the Auditor and Treasurer in which with
all the seeming boldness Of conscious
innocence they. courtcd investigation
and yet were at the very same time
using every effort which terror.strickcn
guilt could inspire to Strangle II; quar-.
reling with the sergeant.at.Arms ol the
House because he rejoiced in the pros.
pect that IN investigation would show up
the hidden corruption Of the Radicals,
and surprising him with the intimation
that his zeal might play the devil with
them, (thc Auditor and Treusnrer) The
Judge called upon tho members Of the
House to beware Of any attempt to thrOt-
Tie this investigation, IT might play the
devil with them among their constituen.
Cy. Where the Judge left the case we
leave II for the present and wonder what
more can be said.