Holmes County Republican. [volume] (Millersburg, Holmes County, Ohio) 1856-1865, 1857-08-27

| 1oo2, John u, BreslIn, - 46S,I4l Is
1853. -. 75O35I 90
1854, .- 5S4994 81
1855, 683574 80
ls56,Wm. H. Gibson. 35O,54S So
The act of 1s46 authorized the Treas
urer of State to call upon County Treasur-
ers to deposit in advance of their February
settlements. Mr.. Breslin was not back
ward in availing himself of the powers con-
ferred on him by that law. The County
Treasurers were liberal in their deposits
In 1855 he refunded to them $6l 1927 40,
which they had paid above the amount of
taxes due from their counties to the State.
AT the annual statement in 1856, Mr.. Glib
son refunded to them an excess of $44, 1s3-
50, which bad been deposited with Mr..
Breslin previous to his retiring from Office.
WHO IS THE DEFAuLTER7
The evidence against Mr.. Gibson CON
sists of acknowledgements made BY him
to public officers and committees of the
Legislature in his official character and un-
der the solemnity of his official OATH
There is nothing in the testimony of the
witnesses indicating that he had embezzled
the public funds. Though We have made
diligent inquiry, we have found no trace of
any investment made by him beyond what
his private pecuniary resources would JUS
tify.
The books Of the office do not show
that any portion of the balance due the
State from Mr.. Breslin has ever been paid
to Mr.. Gibson, or that any funds were ever
placed in his hands to redeem outstanding
certificates to county treasurers.
In his settlement with county treasur-
ers in 1856, Mr.. Gibson received the cer-
titcates of deposit or receipts issued by Mr..
Breslin, and charged himself with them Is
cash in his account with the several classes
of revenue. The act of 1s46 required the
the county treasurers to make their depos-
its to the State Treasurer, and prescribed
the time and manner of making them,
They had been made in exact conform
| ity with the provisions of the statute. It
was not, therefore, competent for him to
pronounce them illegal, or refuse to credit
them on the account of the several parties
to whom they had been issued.
In the Settlement Book" these certifi-
Gates are marked with the identical mark
or full name of Mr.. Breslin.
Mr.. Gibson has kept his accounts and
made his reports in manner which inn
piled that Mr.. Breslin had paid in full the
balance due from him to the State. He
had been silent about any defalcation of
bis predecessor. His silence raises the pre-
sumption of payment. The legitimate
inference, under ordinary circumstances
would be, that the Indebtedness had been
fully discharged; but in the financial trans
actions of the Ohio State Treasury, such
reasoning would be illogical.
Mr.. Bliss transferred all the balance
due from his predecessor to his books, vet
it is well known that Mr. Whitehouse,
without authority of law, retained Sc, 900
of these balances. 1t is true, and but JUS
tice to Mr.. Whitehouse to say, that upon
close scrutiny of bis accounts, this sum has
been found really due and has been allow
ed to him.
By the same process Of book keeping,
Mr.. Breslin concealed deficit of $65, 1000
for his predecessor. He not only conceal
ed it, but in response to resolution of the
Senate ayerred that Mr.. Bliss had paid
over to him the balance which appeared on
the book of the department. 1t has been the
uniform practice of successive Treasurers to
carry forward the balances due from their
predecessors without regard to the fact of
payment. The manner in which the books
Of the office have been kept, does not there
fore prove that Mr.. Breslin furnished Mr..
Gibson with means with which to redeem
outstanding certificates, or paid him any
portion of the public funds in his hands at
the expiration of his official term.
The statements of Mr.. Gibson, made on
on numerous occasion, his official character
and over his official signature maka very
strong case against him.
Ina letter Of March I4th, 1856, address.
ed to Mr.. Kelley, chairman of the Finance
Committee Of the Senate, he SAYS: aMy
predecessor has provided means from time
to time to meet these certificates, and but
$lS0,000 are now outstanding; when he
fails to receive these illegal certificates"
The certificates issued BY Mr.. Breslin in
1856, amount to $76O,715 SO. The fore
going statement is equivalent to an &C
knowledgeinsat of the receipt Of $3.50, us
20 at that date
In an official statement Of condition Of
the Treasury (which has not been publish
ed, but which is in our possession) furnish
ed by him to the same committee, be &C
knowledges that he had received from his
predecessor in Office, up to the 18th of
February, 1926, the sum of $500, sos 1s-
His letter of the 29th of March, is more
explicit and unequivocal than either of the
preceding statements. 1t is perhaps the
strongest item of evidence against Mr..
Gibson, which has been submitted to our
consideration. Il is so specific, minute
and circumstancial in its character that We
deem it proper to give it in full. Itisas
| follows:
STATE TREAsuRzR's OFFrcs,
Columbus, March 20. 1856.
Hon. A. KELLY, Chairman, &C.: