Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1845-07-31
LoCoFoCo vERAcITY AND DEcENcY

We have not seen particle of the stuff, forming
the ammunition of our opponents for the present
campaign. that is not redolent of the kennel They
have expended all the available contents of their
magazines upon the old impregnable Wing fortress,
and now it appears they to try what virtue there
may be in the slime of the gutter Thus far no
one, not even the veteran Major of the Age, has
evinced such consummate aptitude for this new
plan of operations, as the doughty Captain, our
neghbor of the Patriot. Whether it comes by ma
ture, or by dint of long-contnued practice, we
know not but we are satisfied that he bids fair to
signalize himself above all his competitors. One
thing is certain-he is constantly improving And
last week he clearly outdid himself, and discharged
dirtier pellet than escaped his hands before
Its nature is such that we are constrained to exam
inc it. We should shrink from meddling with it.
if duty did not forbid 1t contains several untruths
and misrepresentation calculated to deceive and
mslead; and they must be exposed, even if our
nostrils do take offence.
Reserving the commencement of the article for
subsequent consideration, we commence in medias
res, and begin with the list of editors charitable
apprehensions.
"Perhaps the people at large are startled and
alarmed when they look back and see that the an
nual State expenses have risen from Sal ,S74 Oh in
1926, to $30,l7 So in ls43."
The State expenses in 1896 were $50 039 46, as
appears by the Auditors Report of that year now
before us. For the purpose Of serving your des-
pcabe object, Mr. Editor of the Patriot, you stated
it over $4,000 less. The expenses for 1Si3 sew
enteen years afterwards, were S99,2l0 7s, as ap-
pears by the Report of the same year; this amount
you increased nearly s3I ,O0O to favor your dishon
est ends. But Why did you select the year '26 rath
er than 25 or ~ or other years about that period
and why '43 rather than IA or '42? Because your
purposes could be bettersuited by comparing those
two particular years, the expenses of the being
for peculiar reasons, uncommonly low and those of
the other uncommonly high. And why did you not
enlighten your readers little respecting the items
which went to account for this increased? Why
did you not say something of the outlay in '43 for
the debentures of the Constitutional Convention
amounting to 5000 G1 j.? and of the largely en-
HANGED debentures of the General Assembly con-
sequent upon the establishment of the State SEN
ate, which did not exist in '26? Why did you not
mention the expenses of militia drills, of which
your party were the especial champions, now hap
PLY abolished, but in '43 amounting to $500, and
in '26 not costing one red cent? Why not mention
the largely increased sums appropriated for the
lief of the deaf, dumb, blind, and insane, against
which appropriations not man of your party dared
to wag his tongue? And why not speak of the
extension of the State Judiciary? and why not of
the heavy payments of interest upon the State debt
which you yourselves helped to contract? Not
syllable of all this, and much more to the same eff
feet. Every thing tending to an explanation is
studiously kept out of view, for the sake of hood
winking and quilting the dear people" Now we
insist upon it, that the most rigid and systematic
economy was exercised in the year I6l3 as also in
all other years since Wing councils have prevailed ;
and we defy you, and your whole fraternity, to lay
your fingers upon single appropriation which your
own party opposed, or one which every consdera-
ton of honor or prudence did not imperatively de-
mand Such foul balderdash Is contemplate.
But again;
"Perhaps they are alarmed when they see our
State debt run up to some $4,000, and constant
ly increasing Notwithstanding the annual ten cent.
tax"
How was this debt originally incurredf BY the
erection of State House, that has proved an Or
nament and credit to our gallant State. Did you
oppose it? Can you find the name of man in
your party recorded in the Legislative Journals
against the measure? No sir, not one. And here
you are, hypocrtically exclaiming against the non
sequences of your own acts. Out upon suchbol-
low cant