The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1857-07-16
From the Ccluml Us ,Ohio) "Capial City Fact
Fillmore paper.
The DefnIcatiOn--''Ezee il Before
the People.


Of all the papers we have ever read, the Jour
nal Of Monday is certainly the most extraordi-
nary. In al editorial article it says KEEP IT
BEFORE THE rEoPLE-that Mr.. Gibson has sta
ted diSSRctiyand published to the world, that the
deialcation wSs caused by John G. Breslin, and
that not one dollar of the public funds has been
lost by him." This is very important TO be so
| distinctly stated by Mr.. Gibson, and should be
kept before the people, but let US see what else
Mr. Gibson has us distinctly stated before.
Mr.. Gibson 'diStiDcly" stated to the Commit
tee of Finance that Mr. Breslin paid him from
the l4th of January 1856, to the 9th of March,
1856, Eight htalll-ei amt Hi,ty-sto hoasnnd dol-
lars, and the Journal in its article of Monday
says, that since that time, 1.-THE Auditor, there
fore, without any previous notice to Mr.. Gibson,
entered the office and proceeded to make an ex-
animation of the money end books Of the depart
ment as required by law He counted the
MONEY and papers in the Treasury and found
them to be corect--just as the investigating
committee did subsequently, and so stated to the
Governor'
So this fact is distinctly stated by the Audi
tor, through the journal, that the MONEY" and
/ papers" and 'bookS" tgere aH TiglH after Gibson
took possession of the office.
| MIR. Gibson himself has stated that matters
were all right. Mr.. Kelley, Mr.. Wright and
the Smelling Committee" made examinations,
and report the money, papers and books all right.
And now to eXonerate Mr.. Gibson from en-
bez2ling any of the money, the Journal says,
"keep it before the people that Mr.. Gibson says
distinctly not0, that he did not embezzle one dol
lar" We are led to believe that the matter had
not been distinctly" stated by any of these
parties before now. 1t is therefore very ilnpor
tant to state matters distinctly" Mr.. Gibson
may lie able to s6eah distinctly now-but he
undoubtedly is troubled with serious ianpe9i-
nlent in his i'll his yeracity which will prove IA
tai to him.
The Journal lays stress upon the fact that
Brcslin will not speak out and deny Gibsons
statement, If he cannot make better fist OF
speaking than Gibson has done, we think he
shows good sense in holding his tongue.
The journal wants to keep before the people"
what Mr. Gibson says. The editors must Ger
tainly have confidence in the credibility of (NIr
/ GlbSon) its Witness as it certainly would not
desire to palm oil upon the people, liar, TO
convict any person OF crime. TO satisfy the peO-
pie that he is an honorable and reliable man, it
says;of him. ''Mr. Gibson, in his desire TO screen
Mr.. Breslin, no douJ borrowed the money fo,
the time bci19 from certain banks, and when he
thuught the examination closed, returned 1t a
gain" The Journal says there is mo doubt Of
Of this. Now, can it be possible that the Re
publican party is 50 far gone as to require the
testimony of such aCitaeas to be "kept before
the people" torany purpose? We always tho't
"the hi,er as bad as the stcaler." The next
question is, which are the certain banks'' that
loaned this money temporarily, for the purpose
OF carrying out the fraud? As the journal says
there is mo doubt" about the matter, it is i'm
portant to know who are all the parties to the
fraud.
Will Auditor Wright inform us who we're the
drawers of the seven hundred and fifty thou
sand dollars, individual" checks? and on what
banks in Columbus they were drawn 1t is inn
portant to the State, the drawers and the hanks
to know whether they were paid. If they are
lost, and not paid, the banks will be compelled
to pay them or protest them. If the ''inliyid-
uals'' are good ior the money, and it can be pro-
ven they were the property of the State, and
lost they ought to be collected. If they were
Swindle, let the people know it. Can't the
journal get Gibson to distinctly state, SO that
it can keep it before the peope?'