Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1859-03-24
STATEMENT
OF Albert A. Bliss.
IN ANSWER TO REEMELIN, MORGAN AND
EDGERTON

AauS cOnuScllLR uty AdLue VIII hne uencleuciS
in the Treasury seemed not to have assumed |
tangible form, preferred not to obtrude upoI
the public Conscious that I have never in
tentionally dishonored public trust and tha
not dollar of loss has accrued to the Statt
Treasury from any misconduct on my part,
have had hope from the result of any impartia
investigation that might be instituted. But the
Report Of Messrs Edgerton, Morgan and Rene
lin shows conclusiEely, that it was not part
of the plan of their investigation to elicit truth
or do Justice. 1 have no reason to complain
that their charges against me are not sufficient
ly serious or sufficiently numerous; but as nu-
merous as they are, the filings, suspicious insin-
uations and inuendoes are more numerous still
1 will proceed to notice as briefly as | can some
Of their charges.
The committee, by peculiar process of rea-
soning, claim to prove that of the sum of S3O4,-
s40 s5 due my successor, Mr. Breslin, the sum
of S37, ,se2 SO was never paid to him How do
they arrive at this conclusion2 1t seems that a
certain cash book, commenced by Mr.. Breslin
when he entered upon the duties of his office,
came into the hands of the committee, in which
book Mr. Breslin entered all his receipts and
disbursements of every nature. In this book,
kept by Mr. Breslin himself is entered consist
ing of numerous items the sum OF $20l ,478 80
as having been received from me. There being
no other entries showing money received from
me, the committee infer that no more money
was paid 10 him by me. To see the force of this
reasoning, it need only be said that this book
if am correctly informed was kept by him for
only month or perhaps six weeks, and the last
entries in it are in the month of February, 1852
and from thence the book was closed forever
This book could of course furnish no shadow of
proof either for or against the probability Of any
payments except such as were made before the
book was closed; and if it proves that it is not
probable that paid him any money afterwards,
it proves with equal conclusiveness that it is
probable no money was ever paid into the
Treasury afterwards from any source.
But il may be said that Mr. Bresln has stated
that no money was paid him except whst is in
that book. He has so stated But will he say
directly that paid him no money after Febru-
aTy, 1892 He will not, 1 anu sure; for one
moments reflection will convince him that
paid him money subsequent to that time
But my own testimony is positive that paid
him the full amount due. Here seems to be a
direct conflict between u.s. Now without wish
ing TO impeach Mr.. Breslin's design to state the
thing Just as It is although his statement Is not
under oath, 1 ask, after taking all the circum-
stances into consideration, which statement is
the most likely to be correct?
1t should be remembered that when l went
out of Office and Mr.. Breslin came in, large
amount Of certificates issued to County Treasu-
rers were still outstanding, and as the books
then stood had largely oyerpaid the State, in
stead Of there being anything due from me- 1t
was only as these certificates were brought in
BY the County Treasures, in making their an
nual settlement with the State, and were charg-
ed to the Treasury and redeemed by the Treas
urer. that the true state Of the Indebtedness
could be shown by the books. 1t will be recol-
lected by many slso, that some Of the County
Treasurers delayed their settlement much later
than usual in 1852, because as understood it,
there was some difficulty between them and the
Auditor of State in reference to the collection
of the bank tax. Ispeak of this state Of things
to show that Mr.. Breslin could with propriety
grant me the time to make such an examination
Of the books and papers Of the office as de-
sired, for the purposes Of my settlement He
very readily granted me all the facilities neces-
sary for that purpose. l Immediately employed
competent accountants, and set about making
as thorough an examination as l could,
This examination was intended to be
thorough and every pains was taken TO have
everything done well and results arrived at ac-
curately. The examination continued through
several months, and after it was concluded,
lthe certificates of the County Treasurers hay
ing in the mean time came in,) and the
+l.o
The amount actually due Mr. Breslin the COM
mittee make 1904, 34O s5. I had paid him in
january S2Ol, AIS 80, and he thinks this is ell
l ever paid him Then of course l still owed
him Si02, $50 56 The amount to be paid was
not the subject Of controversy. 1t was as plain
II before us as the simple figures could make it.
There was no complication Of accounts. The
balances were ascertained, and just that num-
ber of dollars those balances showed to be due
was to be paid There SOGS 30 chance for any
SRistaks about IT, Now if had before that time
paid him only $20l, AIS 80, and still was In
debted more than 500, 600, can he OF any one
else give any probable reason why the sum Of
S65, 600 was fixed upon as the final balance that
remained unpaid9 If my heart had been full
of wicked designs, is it reasonable to suppose
that Icould have imposed upon him and induced
him TO call the balance $4,000 when it was
over Sl00,o00l Is it reasonable to suppose
that he would have received $37, 900 or any
other sum less than the amount due, when he
supposed he had got the whole7 Now IS it not
more likely, and viii not any reasonable, impair
tial man more naturally conclude, that after l
had paid him the $20l,47s 80, and before the
final settlement ! had paid him such an addi-
tional sum as would leave unpaid the S65,
0009 But whatever any ons would natu-
rally conclude, this is the eraet truth. every
dollar was paid In cash, or its equivalent and
if Mr.. Breslin had continued to keep the same
book through the summer that he commenced
keeping in January, the payments would probs-
bly, have been found there.
But ii is claimed thut could not have paid
il because had exhausted all my resources. A
careful examination, they say, shows that had
no balances in banks that were not transferred
TO Mr.. Breslin. Does il follow, because they
could not find that had any balances in banks
that therefore l could have had no other re-
sources? Such an inference, it seems to me, is
by no means legitimate. They say that / hay
ing paid him $4,000 in currency, and some
other cash items, it is not to be supposed had
any other cash to pay him, for it was not usual
for so large an amount of cash to accumulate.
This is not true, for it was usual at that season
ofthe year for a much larger amount of curren-
cy to accumulate. But the Report on the face
Of it shows the fallacy Of this argument, twill
be seen in the amount admitted to have been
paid TO Mr. Breslin, there was large number of
certificates of deposit These certificates were
held as cash, and there would be nothing on the
books TO show whether I had or had not any
such certificates ItYas supposed that it would
be a great convenience in closing up the ae-
counts of my term, to have the bank accounts
closed at some period before my term expired
At what period that was do not now remem-
Der; but do know that instructions were given
to collectors of tolls, and others who deposited
in banks that after certain date, instead of de-