Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1857-07-03
Miseellaneons.
THE DEFALCATroN.

our nelgnDor, the Democrdt, last week
published an article on the Treasury defal-
cation, written by VIM. D. Morgan, late To-
cofoco Auditor of State, in which the dis
honor of the defalcation is sought to be lift.
ed from the shoulders of Mr.. Breslin, and
thrown upon Mr.. Gibson. To show how
much credit the statement of Mr.. Morgan
is entitled to, We give the following article
written in reply to Mr.. Morgan. No honest
reader can rise from its perusal without be-
ing fully persuaded that the late locofoco
Auditor Of State has shown himself in q
very dishonorablc light We ask for it an
attentive perusal:
From the Ohio State Journal
VIM. ID. Torgau--The Newark Advocate
Tho Late DefaIcntion.
We have read with unaffected surprise
two articles in the late number of the New.
ark Advocdte, Buchanan paper, edited by
VIM. D. Morgan, Esq, late Auditor Of
State, and the colleague for four years Of
John G. Breslin during the administration oi
Gov. Medill. We had supposed that under
all the circumstances of the case that Mr.
Morgan would have been willing to have
presented to the people of Licking county
a fair statement of the recently discovered
defalcation, one which "would nothing ex.
tenuate nor set down aught in malice."-
On reading his paper of Friday we have
changed our opinion Of the man, and OF
his political honesty. That paper contains
two articles the first Of which attempts To
exonerate Mr.. Brcslin from all blame, and
treats the statement of Mr.. Gibson as fic-
tion---it lifts tho dofalcation from Mr.. Brcs.
Inns shoulders and places the whole weight
of it upon Mr.. Gibson, and this is done by
n systematic and deliberate suppression o
truth. Not satisfied with this the editor
dcvotes another article to the implication OF
the Governor and the Auditor of State, in
the Treasurer's transaction. He quotes
from the law passed by the Republican
Legislature of 1856. for the better security
of moneys entrusted to the Trcasurcr,-a
law which he acknowledges, he could nev-
er induce Democratic Legislature to pass,
-and which law empowers the Governor,
whenever requested by the Auditor, to ap-
point some suitable person to make an ex-
animation into the Treasury and to report
the same to the Executive. This law pass.
ed April 9Th, 1856, and Mr.. Morgan wants
to know whether any action has ever been
had under it by the Auditor and Governor
He assumes in the same dsingenuous and
jesuitical manner that they have not acted
under it, and that therefore they arc impli-
Gated in the defalcation, not sooner discov-
ering and exposing it.
Such articles and such charges, to say the
least, come with an i'll grace from Mr.. Nor.
gan, who was associated for four years with
Mr.. Brcslin and Governor Medill in tho
State government, and who knew, and
who says that he knew, all tho time
they were in office that an improper use o.
the public money was being made by the
Treasurer. Yet not withstanding all this
this Same Mr.. Morgan was nominated fo
reelection in 1855 with Mr.. Brcslin, and he
would have regarded his election. doubtless,
if not as personal, yet as poli.ical party
triumph. OF all the men in the State
VIM. D. Morgan, and Dr. Trevitt, who was
Secretary of State, knew best of the dcfal
cation of Mr.. Bresln, while they were eaci
in Office with him, and sitting in adjoining
offices for four years in the classic halls O
''rat row." They insinuated the facts yer,
broadly at the time they held office. Mr.
Morgan referred to il incidentally in his re
ports. The two tried to check mate Brcs
lin in the Legislature in the enactment o
laws and in the appointment of Commit
tees; but, moro than all this, they have
since the recent defalcation became known
openly boasted here in Columbus that they
knew Of these frauds upon the Treasury,
and the Misrepresentation Of the fluids
that it was just what they had said would be
the result, and that instead of their being
surprised at the announcement, their only
wonder was that it could have been hid Sc
long. We have heretofore given Mr.. Nor
gan credit for being sincere in his avowals
and that his opposition to Mr. Breslin, and
the frequent quarrels which they had while
serving the State, were occasioned by his
disapprobation of bis official use of the pub.
lie moneys. After reading the two article.
in the Advocdte, we have materially mod
fled our opinion Of the gentleman, and are
induced to believe that his opposition "a
Mr.. Breslin was more of personal than Of
a public nature. For no man of high-ton-
ed principles. could have written those arti-
cles, considering ali the circumstances Of
the case.
And what were these circumstancesl AS
soon as the existence of the deficit in the
Treasury came TO the knowledge Of Cover.