The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1857-08-27
From the Ohio Statesman
The DcfaIcatIOM Report.

7
beore our readers the long expected report of
the commissioners appointed by the Governor to
! investigate the Stupendous dealcation, by which
the State of Ohio has lost something over
| half million ofdolars. The Investigation has
doubtless been conducted with great patience, if
not fairness, and with an evident desire to reach
the facts; vet really with but little success. Tie
conclusions of the committee after all are mere
conjecture, and are not altogether justified by
! the premises.
We believe now, as we believed before, that
tie de(alcation was matter between Gibson and
Breslin, and that the absence OF the latter is for
the purpose of relieving the former, by the as
SUMPTION of the original offence. This the COM
mittee construe into ptjmo tucie evidence ofgut.
| They say:
"rhe conduct ola party Is always Of great in-
portan in determining his guilt or innocence.
| The flight of one accused OF crime is indicatOry
orguit. Instead of avoiding he covetS inquiry
into his conduct"
This general reflection ofthe committee might
| have been spared from the report, although it
contains almost the whole amount ofthe evidence
! of Breslin's guilt. His absence and refusal to
answer arc set down as indicative of his having
committed the offence with which he and Gibson
are charged The impression ot the committee
was rather against Bresln, and it is not singular
that they should come to the conclusion on YER
y slender testimony that he was the sole abstrct-
or of money, and that Gibson only had the aUeah-
i3pss ofc0ncealing the embcZzlement. Ii they
had looked about for m0tjOe for concealment,
they might have discovered more in Gibson than
weakn SIS in a brother in-law to hide the detects
of his relative. Breslin's advent to the Ireasu-
ry was the i'm pulSe to Gibsons fortunc-its ter
minating power-that which gave it life and be-
ing. Prior to that period, what were his poses
SONS? Was he the owner of stocks, capitalist
a Spectator who
| Put down tens where others units wrtns"
Did he burst suddenly upon the financial world
like meteor or did he toll on, patiently watch
ing the golden sands as they accumulated, grain
nv grain? These were questions, if motiUe had
to he ssurht, into which the committee might
we'll have examined.
In commenting upon Gibson's statement the
committee lean very kindly to him, instead o
d9nouncing the fuse concatenation as it deserved
they say:
"rhe statement is carefully and skllInll,
drawn 1t is so constructed as to enable him t
{ sw. ar to it without subjecting himself to Grim
inal Charge, and vet leaves false impression"
The frauds practiccd by Gibson to deceiv
, the examiners and make it appear that the mon
II ~ was in the treasury were as dark as the al
+ Stracton of the money itself, nor is there any
thing to show that the money was not used 70
their m utlal beneht--that one did not act b
the advice and counsel of the other, and that
! was partnership operation throughout.
Its understood that the report emanates frol
: Thos Sparrow, Esq, and auditor Wright
Their report is very volum'nous and certainl
arrives at no very definite conclusion logical
u deduccd from the promises which are still lnor
voluininous the examination of Gibson alon
com Jrising some foo,scap pages.
: We cannot omit quotation which must pre-
h duce a smile even on the check Of the unbcliey
G ing:
i "No one we think can read the testimon
which is here appended, and OF which we hay
Z given brief extract in the foregoing pages with
e out being convinced that the two late treasurer
n were wholly unworthy the positions which the
G have occupied"
d Indeed! Whew! We breathe more freely
!. It is a wonder the committee did not adopt tn
usual routine of delaying legislative action
)f rise report progress and ask leave to sit again
n The fact is the committee discovered nothing
+ They examined Gibson and Schouler and Fo
II lett and seemed particularly struck with SUI
+ posed case that Follet says Breslin put to hin
;. notwithstanding the maxims that are relied O
r, by the committee ia more than one instanc
e to show that they were guided by law.
l. This supposed case is wholly gratuitous.
IS has no business in the report more than tW
- such buzzards as Shoulcr and Follett had
n the confidence Of Breslin, guilty as he may hay
) been. There is rascally concealmcnt or in
q plication which furnishes ground for speculato
,e and leaves the inference that Breslins politics
n friends were copartncrs in his immence fraud
when doubtless the facts are otherwise. Thel
il IS no cearness and dstnctness in the report, an
t. fails entirely to convince, by hanging fact upc
NJ fact that its conclusions are irrefragabe.
70 saws the money was distracted by Breslin, al
d that Gibson concealed the robbery--thus M
), him accessory after the fact, when the most stI
" king inference is that he knew all along Of, al
Of participated in the use of the public funds. II
in Committee say:
Il "Whateyer may bc their respective legal Ii!
u bities, we are not able to discover any dierel
v ces in the moral character Of their actions"
" We do not care to follow the commits
i. through their devious windings. They produt
& very little that is new, and rather confuse th
+ which was known or believed than ellicidate
n Al more ridiculous mouse has seldom been BOZ
i from such mountain, and after more than tv
" m ,nshs travail, and the closest scrutiny, Il
I, committe, confess they ars unable to tell VIII
v has become Of the peoples money. In examii
e ing the refersnce to tho Seneca Bank affair
It the reader will DO struck with the delicacy