Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1859-09-16

]
/ drcn. MIR. DESSisoN spoke first for one hour
then Judge BANSEY for two hours, when Mr..
DENSIsoN closed. Full reports Of both specch-
es arc given below, Mr.. DENNIsoN's speech
being reported for the Leaier and Judge RAN
NEYs for the Democrat
Mr. Dennison said:
! My FELLow CITIZENS: / have no expectation,
my fellow citizens that my voice will reach the
| outer circles of this crowd. Not having Wig
/ orous voice at best, what little have has he-
| come very much impaired by being too fre-
/ quently used in the course Of the past four ur
/ five weeks. lwill however, ondeavor, as best
! | can, to make myself heard. for came here
to-dav, my friends and fellow citizens, to tell
| you truths thrt | want you to ponder well.
| came here to-day to present the claims of
the great Republican Party and TO expose, as
best can, the fsilacies and the lalsities OF tho
sO-caled Democratic party. | come here to
discuss beiO,o you, in as plain and Ineligible
form as l may be able, those great principles
which underlie the structure Of great political
party. That you, as the sovereign power OF the
State may be able 10 determine what is your
duty, not only in the pending election, but in
all future elections, and must proceed to my
argument without any prelimnaries what
| ever.
II has not been my good fortune TO agree at
/ all times with my distinguished opponent dur
ing our late discussions to the facts of histo~
~ bearing upon these questions, or as to the
great principles OF action involved ia th0m.-
| 1t has not been my good fortune, | say, to come
TO any common points of understanding with
that distinguished gentleman, except upon one
or two points only, to which l will call your at.
tenton in the course Of my remarks.
have ondcavorcd to charge and prove
epon the SO called Democratic party,
want of fidelity in the discharge of the duties
devolving upon them in tho administration Of
our own State government Ihave eudeayoTod
TO show that from the time they came into
power, in January 1859, to the close of their
administration in January 1856, coming into
power with the profession that If entrusted with
authority, they would SO administer the affairs
of State to lessen the public expenses, and
relieve the people of much of the burden Of
taxation which had previously been imposed
| upon them have endoayUrcd to show, say,
that instead Of doing this, they have actually
increased the annual average expense OF the
government over 5000 600.
have shown more than that have shown
that during the four years OF Republican ad.
ministration, not more than 81 200 600 was col
lected from the people, 100000 OF which was
used toward the payment Of the public debt,
!
made this charge upon the authority Of tho Au-
ditor of State, " no is the fiscal officer of the
State And have no reply TO this from the
gentleman who is opposed to me, except that
he has some indirect information OF other, from
some body or other that | am mistaken.
| now call upon tho gentleman, In his reply,
to meet definitely and distinctly, the charge
make, which is, prohigacy under the Demo-
cratic Iue--an increase of the expenses of the
.I.Na.. & NNa..aw 1lasN sNsUaHa
and their promises to the people.
have charged that during the four years Of
Democratic rule while the fact was current and
welLknown that your Treasury was being rob
bed, that your monies were being misappro'
priated, that there was no provision made by
the Democratic Legislature for the better
keeping of the public monies To which the
gentleman replies, that they were under the
old law 5, and that therefore there was no neces.
sity for such provision. But under the Old
laws there was suspicion of Il robbery OF the
Treasury, and then indeed there was no need of
such provision But under the Democratic rule
there was not only the suspicion but the fact,
and | charge the Democratic administration
with being recreant to their trust in not eXrr-
cising due vigilance over the peoples money
| want the gentleman. therefore, TO give some
better reason for their action.
have charged that the moment the Demo
cratic party came into power in 1887, their
rule became distinguished by the most paTtiZan
legislatiOu-thst where one OF the provisions of
the Constitution of the State took from the leg
islature all appointments, except only, and as
were necessary, for the organization Of the
| LeQisature-that they, IN utter disregard of
| this endeavored to divcst your Governor of the
| power of appointment, cOnsttutionally belong
! ing to him; and for no other reason than be-
cause he did not happen to be member of
their so-oSled Democratic party. But even
| this attempt to take this power from the Gov
ernor, and give it to other persons, was viO-
lation of the Constitution Of the State of Ohio,
and was made for no other purpose than to
carry out the purposes of partlZanship.
/ have charged that they also have violated
til; Constitution in their effort to disOrganize
the Board of Public Works contemplated by
the Constitution, so as TO make three Boards
instead of one, and that in doing this, their
only object was to confer upon ono member Of
that Board, Democrat, power superior TO that
possessed by his associates. In doing this, too,
they have violated th1 spirit of tbs Constitution,
and have organized, in fact, three diStinct
Boards in place of one The gentleman says
| in reply to this, that we have dit0dys divided
the duties of the Board into three parts 1t is
true that we have divided their duties, but you
will remember, fellow citizens, that heretofore
each member of the Board has been under the
control of the others But, in the new form,
\ tho whole power is given to each member, so
that n fact there are three distinct Boards in
place Of one. / want TO have the gentleman
defend this assault upon the Constitution, by
giving some better reason for it than he has
done in our discussions heretofore.
There is some difference, also, between my
friend and myself in regard to the modn Of
collecting, keeping and disbursing the public
revenues. | do not know, however, that there
is so great a difference here as many may sup
pose. lie is a defender OF what he ca lis the
present Sub Treasury. | assail the Sub Treas
uTy, because it is not what it pfoiesscs TO be
and is not, in my opinion, the safest and SUES
deposie for the public treasury, and ayOw my,
Z self here TO day as the adVo0ats Of that ysteu
which will be the most effective and safe fOl
collecting, keeping, and disbursing the public
money. And say that this il not only not ia
conformity with the plan OF the Sub Treasury
{ of the United States, but is defective inas-
much as it obliges the Treasurer to keep all th,
funds of the State, which may at any time b,
$500 900, Sl,O0O,0OO, or upwards, while i
only requires from him bond with forleitur,
IN the sum of $3.50 600 l say that the ole
law was safer than what Is called the indepen
dent Treasury law; for by it the Treasurer wal
required to deposit tho public money will
parties and under bonds approved by tht
Auditor of State and the State Attorney Gen
eral, which placed the Government beyond th,
possible risk Of loss do not understand tina
) there ia any difference between my friend an,
n myself as to the mode of collecting the pub
money. | understand him to say that ho is il
favor OF having the taxes paid in the paper O
the Ohio State Banks | am in favor Of havinj
Is them paid in any way that may be found to b.
I. Wlsest and the best. But without noing into tn