New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-04-30

ALBANY Monday, Oct. b. 1851.
GENTLEMEN: Rumors have been put in circulation
by the Wings along the line of the Canals, with view
to defeat the Democratic party ut the approaching cleo
on the effect that you are elected to the places tor
which you have been respectively nominated, you wi
Extra Session of the last Legislature for the Enlarge
men of the Erie and Oswego and the completion OF the
Black River and Genesee Valley Canals
Our object in addressing you is to ascertain whether
these rumors have any foundation in fact An early re-
ply will oblige, Yours, &C..
ASA d. Woop, JAS. H. MALLORY,
O. c. HUBBARD JAS. II. SHERRILL,
w. W. WRIGHT
John Wright Henry Randall Horace Wheaton Levi
5. Chatheu, BENJAMIN WEIGH, Jr and William hcAp'ne
ALBANY, "Wednesday, Oct %, 1851
GENTLEMEN: We have respectively received your
communication of the 18th inst and in reply, beg leave
to assure you that the referred to by you have
no foundation whatever in fact On the contrary we
have not bestated to say, repeat that elected
TO places for chich hare been nominated ace shall
faithfully and fairly carry out the provisions Of the lao
adopted at The late ertro session Of the Legislature tSr ne
enlargement Of The Erie and Osrego, and The compilation
of The Genesce Ydlley and Black Rir1 Canals
We regard an early enlargement of the Erie and Os-
wego, and the completion of the lateral canals, as
of public necessity, to which the energies OF
the State should be steadily directed.
Respectfully yours,
JOHN c. WRIGHT, LEVI s. CHArFrELD,
HORACE WHEATON, WIN j. McALrINE.
Messrs Asa D. Wood o. c. Hubbard Jas. H. Mallory, Jas
shirrer and w, w. Wright
This correspondence also appeared in The Re-
public lBuffalo,) edited by Benz. Welch Jr., one
of the signers above also the other journals of
the party, just before the Election.]
These pledges did their intended work.
The Anti Canal Counties had already been
secured to the Party by its anti-Enlarge-
ment sympathies and demonstrations; and
now thousands of disaffected or wavering
Canal men were satisfied and reclaimed.
The Election followed, and, though the vote
was very close, the signers of the above
Pledge were nearly all elected.
We now ask the People to compare
the above Pledges with the conduct of their
signers since their accession to office-with
the hubbub about the Contracts, the refusal
to pay the drafts drawn in favor of con-
tractors for work duly certified by the
proper Engineers, the suit instituted and
carried on to procure judicial annulment
of the Speedy Enlargement act as unconsti-
tutional, &c, &c. And it is creditably re-
ported that, in the secret sittings of the
Canal Board, several members named
above, on being confronted with the
Pledges aforesaid, have declared that they
nerer SIGNED them!
What depth of dishonesty is here re-
vealed! These men saw these Pledges
sown broadcast from day to day-saw their
own names paraded in capitals in journals
devoted to their interest as signatures to
pledges of acquiescence in and fidelity to
the Speedy Enlargement law-knew that
votes were being won for them on the
strength of these pledges in undodbting
faith that theywere genuine-yet they said
not word They lay still and took the
benefit of those pledges as genuine, and,
having been elected by their means, now
coolly repudiate them as fictitious, and act
in direct antagonism to their dictates If
this be not base fraud, what could be
And whether they expressly repudiate the
pledges in words or not is immaterial,
since we know that they are repudiated in
deeds.
Then look at the dust raised over the
Canal Contracts, and judge of its motives
and ends. Those contracts are either hon.
est or fraudulent, valid or invalid, and the
Canal Board is the arbiter on this point
That Board is largely Opposition, composed
in good part of the men elected by pledges
as aforesaid. If they regard the awards of
contracts made by the Letting Boards last
December as fraudulent, they have only to
say so and cancel them, ordering new con-
tracts TO issue TO the lowest responsible
bidders. OF course, their decision to this
effect might be traversed in the Courts;
but it would be conclusive unless overruled
By the Court of Errors, containing but one
Wing out Of eight Judges. The Canal
Board might have anticipated the action OF
the Legislature : and, indeed, we cannot
see that the Legislature can effectively act
in the premises. True, we think the Canal
Board ought to do what the Legislature has
directed by Its recent act; but none the
more because of such enactment. In any
case, the Canal Board should have prompt
ly taken Its course and firmly pursued it.
In lodging behind a clamor about Canal
Contracts, and making that pretext for
doing nothing, it has eyinced its deadly vet