The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1859-09-15

pOrIant concern Wnlcn WOulu natufdnl CnSoSO
the attention of the Legislature would be the
subject of finance, the custody and disourse-
ment of the public revenue, and the arrange
ment of taxation. We will, by reference to the
records, find that under this Administration, or
rather under this egislation-because the Leg
islature either directly or indirectly arranges
the whole system of taxation--there was rapid
increase of the taxation of the State. We find,
too. while the Treasury was thus filed from the
taxation of the people, there was no legislation
whatever, directed to the object Of securing the
proper administration of your public revenue
In other words, there was no legislation what
ever for the regulation of the Treasury, in its
receipt, safe keeping, and disbursement, Of the
public funds. That is unquestionable. DIFF
ferent men explain this thing differently. The
Democrats say that there was a division in
what is called the Democratic party, and that
portion of the Wings went with portion Of
the Democrats to defeat proper measures. OF
that L have nothing to say, because / hold 1t
for certain truth that, when a party has ma
jority-a clear majority-in the legislative and
administrative branches of Government, that
party is responsible for the administration of
the affairs of that Government. If that be not
SO, there is no use to have any organization
whatever, and there is no responsibility az all.
/ take 1t, then as a settled thing, which the
common sense of all mankind justiies, that the
party which has a clear majority in legislation
and administration is responsible for its legis
lation and for the administration of the Gov
eminent.
This party neglected, during its term of four
years-during the whole term of the first Legis
lature, which held two sessions, and during the
two years Of the succeeding Legislature, which
held one session-to make any effective pro-
L r u
public money, but left it entirely at loose ends.
So much for legislation. Now for admins
tration. Mr.. Breslin was Treasurer; he was
elected in 1851. To him was committed the
custody of all your revenue Of every kind, as
State Treasurer. Mr.. Morgan was Auditor
Mr.. Medill was Governor. As early as 1853,
Mr.. Breslin was suspected of mismanagement
of the revenue of the State; he was suspected
of using the public funds for his own private
benefit. What was it the duty of his associates
in the State Administration to do? That is
the question which l address to an intelligent
audience. In my humble judgment, their duty
was plain. 1t was to expose that misconduct
to the people, to see to it, that he was deprived
of the trust which he thus unworthily fulfilled
Upon that, / suppose there can be no honest
difference of opinion.
What was done in point of fact? In 1853
the fall Of l853-the parties held State Con-
ventiOns, and Mr.. Breslin was nominated for
reelection. Governor Medill was nominated
for Governor. Not a word was lisped to the
people of the State as to the actual condition of
their Treasury That is true. Was it right?
| think there is nobody, be he Democrat or Re-
publican, who will say that that was right.
The people, ignorant of this mismanagement,
reelected Mr.. Breslin in 1853. Encouraged
by impunity thus far, in l854-'5 he went on in
the same career, and at the close of 1855 when
he went out of Office, he had distracted from
the State Treasury between FIVE and six hun
dred thousand dollars, of which amount he rem
dered no account. There were, besides that,
moneys deposited in unsafe places and such
like, which, added to what is commonly called
the efalcatiOn-deposited by him in various
institutions, as he alleged, in the exercise of
his righttul authority, where it proved to be in
secure, and where 1t has been in part lost to
the State = making the amount some three
quarters or near a million of dollars; but the
defalcation which existed in point of fact, of
which there was no account anywhere was be-
tween five and six hundred thousand dollars.
This was known to all the public officers con-
nected with the administration of the Govern
ment, and especially to the Auditor to the Gov
ernor, and to the transfer agent at New York
l say that the existence Of some defalcation,
and that measured by hundreds of thousands of
dollars, was known. About that there can be
no question.
What, again, was the duty of these agents !?
1t seems to me that the duty of these officers
was to communicate this information imme-
diately to the people. 1t was the duty, as it
seems to me, of the Governor, to require Mr.
Breshn to resign his office, and then take his
chance, before the tribunals of the country, or
immediately to cause prosecution under ar
rest, and to bring about the appointment, under
the Constitution, of a new Treasurer. That
seems to me to have been the duty Of the Gov
ernor and State officers. Did they do it? We
all know they did not We all know that these
very State officers we're nominated for re-elec-
ton upon the same ticket with Mr. Bresln !;
they went on the same ticket with him, and
thus gave to his conduct before the people. al.
though they knew what he was doing. the
highest sanction. Was that right? l think
not.
REPUBLICAN, LEGISLATION AND ADMINISTRATION.
Well, now, l have said what the legislation
and administration upon this important subject
actually was. As | have said, the Republican
party rose at this time. 1t was not the old
Wing party. 1t is not responsible for the
acts OF the old Wing party. 1t is not the
Free Soil party. it Is not responsible for the
acts of the Free Soil party. Nor was it the
Democratic party. 1t was a new party, or
rather an old party revived. 1t was the Jeffer.
sonian Republicanism revived in 1854. That
party IN 1855 elected its State ticket and its
members OF the Legislature, and, it being a new
party, 1t is to be tested by its new acts.
The very moment the Republicans obtained
the control of the Government, they sought to
reduce the expenditures so far as was in their
I j..
Ject, but if L could, | could explain it more
minutely. They went to work to organize q
system for the safe keeping of the public money.
What was that system? 1t required that the
Treasurer should take bonds from every depos-
Itary OF the public money, in such sums and
with such securities as would make the safe
! keeping of the money sure, beyond all question
or peradventure. That was the original princi-
| pie.
| Well, all that l have to say in regard to this
! system, because it has hardly had fair trial
| It existed only during the brief term of the
! Republican Administration, and only part OF
that-al have to say in regard to it is, that |
beileye, II the system had been adopted bv the
| hrSt Legislature which assembled under the
new Constitution, that there would have been no
deialcanon to-day to complain of; l believe if
that system had been adopted-if in addition N
the bond of the Treasurer, there had beep re-.
! quired OF every depOsitary sufficient security
to oblige him to keep the public money safe.
there would have been no defalcation, and your
public moneys would have been in satisfac
tory condition all the while. OF that have no
doubt
So much in regard to Republican legislation.
| Whether you think it was the best lepislation
or not, l don't undertake to say, but | think
you will say that it was incomparably better
than the absence of all legislation which pre-.
coded it.
Then, fellow citizens, we come to admins