Sealed Book Of Moses Pdf

[Young Vadlapatla]

So if there is going to be a relationship between God and man, a right relationship, God is the one who is going to have to take the initiative. We would not know God otherwise. And God is the one who will have to take the action to deal with our sin, to atone for our sin, because surely there is nothing we could do to make up for it.

Centuries later, the Lord God revealed himself to Abram, and established a covenant of promise with him. The Lord would bless Abram and make of him a great nation, and all the families of the earth would be blessed through his offspring. Yes, that covenant too was sealed with blood, circumcision serving as the sign of the covenant.

And so tonight you receive the very body and blood of Christ, given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins. And where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also life and salvation. Your sins are forgiven; they will not kill you and damn you for eternity. Your Savior gives you his body and his blood, and these will give you life and save you for eternity.

And it is all because a Lamb went uncomplaining forth: Christ, the Lamb of God, willingly going the way of the cross for you, sealing the once-and-for-all covenant of promise with his own most precious blood.

A bond to the United States, conditioned that a property anddisbursing officer of the War Department shall faithfully dischargehis duties and faithfully account for public money and propertycommitted to his charge, takes effect on the day when it isaccepted by the government, and is to be regarded as of thatdate.

When it appears that such a bond, duly signed by sureties, hadbeen offered to the government official and rejected by him as notbearing seals, and that it was taken away by the property anddisbursing officer, the principal, and returned with proper seals,it will be presumed, in the absence of proof to the contrary, thatthe seals were attached with the consent of the sureties.

The Chief Signal Officer had the right to designate one of theofficers under him as a property and disbursing officer to whomshould belong the custody of all government property and fundspertaining to the office of the Chief Signal Officer, and hefurther had the power, under the general direction of the Secretaryof War, to provide that such officer should be responsible for thedue execution of his official duties, and, a bond having been givenfor such faithful performance, and such officer having been guiltyof the forgery of vouchers and the embezzling of public moneysofficially received by him, such conduct was a plain violation ofhis duty as such officer, and the condition of the bond, as itplainly covered such conduct, was violated thereby.

A certificate given to such disbursing officer before thediscovery of his fraud that his accounts had been examined, foundcorrect, and were closed, did not operate to release him or hissureties from liability on the bond.

were admissible in evidence as sufficient transcripts withinRev.Stat. 886, and the certificate which certified that thepapers annexed thereto were true copies of the originals on file,and of the whole of such originals, was a full compliance with thelaw.

On the 7th day of December, 1880, First Lieutenant H. W.Howgate, Acting Signal Officer, U.S. Army, sent in his resignationto the Adjutant General at Washington, through the Acting ChiefSignal Officer. At that time, there was in existence paragraph2394, United States Army Regulations, which provided that

"an officer retiring from service shall, before final payment,produce certificates from the several accounting officers ofnonindebtedness to the United States, and make an affidavit uponthe final voucher, stating in addition the correctness of itsseveral items, the place of his residence, and that he is notindebted to the United States on any account whatever."

These certificates were obtained by Lieutenant Howgate, and hisresignation was accepted by the President, to take effect December18, 1880. On the 27th of April, 1881, a final payment was made tohim of $104, being the balance due him for salary, etc., and hisaccounts as then appearing on the books of the government stoodbalanced. Soon after the date of this final payment, it becameevident from examinations made in the books of the government andby investigations from other sources that Lieutenant Howgate hadperpetrated gross frauds upon the government by means of fraudulentand forged vouchers, which had been accepted by the government asgenuine, and upon which his certificates for settlements had beenmade. Upon a restatement being had in which these false andfraudulent vouchers were omitted from the credits which had beenthereby given to him, it appeared that he was a defaulter in thesum of over $133,000. On the 24th of August, 1881, an action wascommenced by the government against him to recover over$100,000,

By virtue of this judgment, the property which had been seizedby virtue of the attachment issued in the action was sold, and thesum of $28,000 was realized upon such sale, and the amount thereofcredited upon the judgment.

This present action was commenced on the 29th of September,1884, on a bond alleged to have been executed by the defendantsnamed in the action, being Henry W. Howgate, William B. Moses, andLebbeus H. Rogers. Of these defendants, Mr. Moses was the only oneserved with process.

"on the second day of April in the year of our Lord 1878 at thedistrict aforesaid, by their certain writing obligatory of thatdate, sealed with their seals, and now here in court produced,jointly and severally bound and acknowledged themselves to beindebted to the plaintiff in the sum of twelve thousand dollars, tobe paid to plaintiff on demand, yet, though requested, the saiddefendants have never paid the same to plaintiff, but have whollyneglected and refused, and still do neglect and refuse, so todo."

Washington, D.C., and Lebbeus H. Rogers, New York City, NewYork, are held and firmly bound unto the United States of Americain the sum of ($12,000) twelve thousand dollars, lawful money ofthe United States, to be paid to the United States, for whichpayment well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, and each ofus, our and each of our heirs, executors and administrators, forand in the whole, jointly and severally, firmly by thesepresents."

"The condition of this obligation is such that, whereas theabove-bounded First Lieutenant Henry W. Howgate, 20th Inf't'y, hasbeen assigned to duty as a property and disbursing officer, SignalService, U.S.A., _____ has accepted said assignment:"

"Now, if the said 1st Lieutenant Henry W. Howgate, 20thInfantry, shall and doth at all times henceforth and during hisholding and remaining in said office carefully discharge the dutiesthereof and faithfully expend all public money and honestly accountfor the same and for all public property which shall or may comeinto his hands on account of Signal Service, U.S. army, withoutfraud or delay, then the above obligation to be void; otherwise toremain in full force and virtue."

New York on the 13th day of March, 1878. It also contained thejustification of Mr. Moses as surety, and purported to have beensworn to by him on the 14th day of March, 1878, at Washington, D.C.The bond also contained the endorsement of Chief Justice Cartter ofthe Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, certifying thatsatisfactory evidence of the sufficiency of the sureties to thebond had been given, and that he approved the same.

A second count to this declaration was subsequently added, inwhich the appointment of the defendant Howgate to the signal officeat Washington, his assignment to duty there as property anddisbursing officer, the execution of the bond bearing date the ___day of March, 1878, its delivery and the condition contained insuch bond, the receipt of a large amount of public moneys, and thefailure to expend and honestly account for the sum of one hundredand thirty-three thousand and odd dollars, were all set forth atlength and in detail.

The defendant Moses filed several pleas setting forthsubstantially the defenses: (1) that the alleged writing was nothis bond; (2) that it was extorted from Howgate without anyauthority of law; (3) that there was no such office created by lawas was mentioned in the bond, and no duties pertaining to theoffice prescribed by law, or by any regulation or order of anydepartment or officer, and that the alleged bond was void foruncertainty; (4) that the accounting officer of the Treasury hadduly settled the accounts of Howgate and issued to him acertificate of nonindebtedness to the Untied states, of which thedefendant Moses had notice, which discharged him from liability assurety on the bond; (5) that Howgate had kept and performed thecondition of the bond.

Prior to the trial, and on the second of May, 1892, Moses died,and the suit was continued against his administrators. The trialcommenced on the 22d of March, 1893. To maintain its case, thegovernment gave evidence as to the organization of the SignalService. It then offered in evidence a duly certified copy of theorder, dated April 18, 1868, from the Adjutant General's office,directing Lieutenant Howgate to report

"First Lieutenant H. W. Howgate, 20th infantry, brevet captain,U.S.A. acting signal officer's assistant, is hereby assigned toduty 'as property and disbursing officer' at this office, togetherwith such other duties as may be assigned to him."

It appears from the record that this bond was referred by theWar Department on the 27th of March, 1878, to the judge advocategeneral for an opinion as to its sufficiency and form; that, on thesame day it was returned to the Secretary of War by the JudgeAdvocate General, with a communication that the bond was in dueform

whereupon, on the 29th of March, 1878, the bond was returned toLieutenant Howgate, by order of the Secretary of War, "to have theproper seals affixed." On the 1st of April, 1878, the bond wasreturned to the War Department, accompanied by a writtencommunication, signed by Lieutenant Howgate, in which he said thatthe bond was "respectfully returned to the honorable Secretary ofWar with seals affixed as per instructions." Thereupon, and on thesecond day of April, 1878, the bond was approved. The governmentthen called the subscribing witness to the bond as to Howgate andMoses. The witness proved their signatures, and that they executedthe bond at the Signal Office in Washington, March 14, 1878. Thewitness thought, though he was not positive, the seals were then onthe bond. (In this he must have been mistaken, as the abovestatement substantially proves the contrary.) The bond was thenoffered and received in evidence under defendants'

c80f0f1006