Click image to open full size in new tab
Article Text
SOUTH CAROLINA'S MONEY. THE GAME OF POLITICS UNSCRVPULOUSLY PLAYED. Rumors about what Parker might have Done had be not been Liberated-Chamberlain Anxions about his Reputation, CHARLESTON, S. C,, Sept. 1.-On the 10th of December, 1873, Messfs. Swalls, Smalls, McIntyre, Jones. and Corwin, on the part of the Senate, and Messrs. Robertson. Puffer, Boston, Ellison, and Minart, OD the part of the House, were anpointed a joint committee from the General Assembly to investigate and report on the affairs of the Bank of the State. Gen. W. J. Whipper was elected their solicitor, and they were to report at the next session of 1874-'75. They did not report, and DO one has ever explained why they did not. As told to me, the affairs of the bank were in a bad way. Accordingly Judge Graham faced public opinion in changing the receiver of the bank. and appointed Puffer. one of the committee, the receiver, and gave him $30,000 down for his commissions. Puffer received out of this sum $3,600, and the balance was divided smong certain members of the committee to stifle the report. When Hardy Solomans's bank failed. he gave one of the reasons for his being short of funds In the face of $50,000 lately removed from the People's National Bank of Charleston to his bank, that he had to raise $50,000 for the-Bank of the State. There may be a connection between these two, and the deposit may have been made to meet the draft. At any rate the $50,000 for Puffer was divided as follows Puffer received for himself. $2,592. Puffer received for Simonton. now receiver. $4,408. Puffer received in certificate of deposit $43,000 -$50,000. There is another coincidence. The amount in all which was deposited with Hardy Solomans by the State was $207,000. The amount now due by Solomans to the bank is the $43,000, and Chamberlain's receipt for $165,000, making $208,000. These investigations have been induced by the statement lately made to me that Chamberlain is anxious and willing to account for the $165,000 of assets, for which Simonton holds his receipt. The history given me is as follows Chamberlain during the last campaign received these assets from Puffer. and upon them the money was raised for electioneering purposes in the campaign. The deposits of State funds by the Financial Board made this good. and relieved the assets from the pledge they were under. They were therefore returned to Chamberlain's custody, and be may be ready and willing to be rid of them. The defalcation represented by the $43,000 is evidently outside of the $165,000. The certificate given that such an amount was deposited by Puffer with Solomans is clearly false and fraudulent. and was intended. when produced before the court two days before Solomans failed, to cover the defalcation above the receipt. An investigating committee has already been suggested for this matter. Gen. W. J. Whipper and ex-Clerk of the Court A. C. Richmond expect to be put upon it. Where another $30,000 of hush money 18 to come from is yet to be seen. The Bank of the State cannot afford it, for there is nothing in the bank. and Col. Simonton is not likely to lend bimself to such a proceeding The $43,000 deposit of Hardy Solomans may have been prudentially reserved for that purpose. An irresponsible bank. with no responsible stockholders and with that amount loose, presents an inviting field for operators who know the figures behind the scenes. What a good time they will have ordering fine wines and good cigars from Hardy's mammoth grocery, to be paid for out of it! But this version is unnatural. and it is more likely the $208,000 and the $207,000 are both gone. Hardy has bis State claims to discount in full ag inst the latter. and he h S two certificates of 1864 from State banks given by the Bank of State, which will more than cover the claim of $208,000 due that bank, Besides. that will be an end.of. of an ---ill
