Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1861-02-07
,n.r,rouM ,nrRovEmEsr.

Total 80 80 NVf'Sfr'H'S ~
We might add several thousand doi.ars to
this exhibit. but as 1t already 81 O4S 6o great
er than the sum stated by US in the article from
which Mr.. MARTIN 30 confidently and ostenta-
tiously dissented,o we will desist from further
gleanings Of matter still to be found in the
ponderous report of the Board; having proved,
we think, that however much the Board may
diatort the facts and confuse the figures, yet
when appropriately and fairly used, they "can,
not lie." ARES ~ .a.aeg ,s1nofcad Esd
We said on the 3lst Of January, that We
would not give pinch Of snuff for all the re-
ports which the Board could make from shsSt'
time until the Legislature adjourned, because
they would not be reliable. After the exhibit
we have made in this article, what candid man
will cay that we were not justified In what We
said al that time? t5ii.,, F-,-;,i--+! lasg -
Mr.. MARrIN intimates that we haves sought to
dspfecate the canals for the benefit Of individ-
al spectators. In reply to this charge we have
to say, that the assertion Is not only un"ar-
ranted and without foundation, but the files Of
t,,e Statesman will show that We have repeatedly
declared that they were valuable property, AMI
our efforts have been to impress the General
Assembly with the necessity of doing something
to rescue them from the utter decay and des-
truetion, to which they we're rapidly tending,
under Mr.. MARrrN & Co.'S estate manage
ment.", Neither Mr.. MARrrs nor the Board pro.
pose any change in the policy of the manage.
ment of these Works. They prophesy and
promise, that at some future time, the
next year, and for q series Of the "nsxs
years" they will make "net revenue to the
State" But without reform, that day will ney'
er come, and Mr.. Martin must be an exceeding.
ly sanguine man to believe, under the present
system of management, that 1t ever will.
We do not mean to assault the particular
members Of the Board now in office. The same
thing which is now occurring. will continue to
occur, no matter who may manage the Canals
Ten years ago there was Board Of Public
Works in Office, who in one year turned over to
the treasury some $45O, 900, net revenue, after
keeping the canals in good repair. The same
men could not now, II in the Board, do the same
thing; and It is shameful and wicked in Mr..
MARTIN and all others guilty of such conduct,
to seek to embarrass the Judgment Of the mem
bers Of the Legislature, andto confuse and con
| found them, or the subject os these canals; =
subject on which, unfortunately for the State,
there 10 but little practical knowledge among
the great mass of tho members.
Mr.. MARTrN was elected to the Office he now
fills In October 1858, and took his seat in the
Board two yesrs ago. We took charge of the
Sfatesnas some six weeks before he assumed
theduties of his Office. He was here, however,
most of the time from the beginning Of the ses-
zion until he assumed the duties Of Q member cl
the Board. This canal question was then up.
A bill to sell the canals had passed the House,
the previous winter, and was then pending In
the Senate. Gov. CHASE in his message to the
Legislature had thrown his influence in favor
of a sale We took subject up, opposed the
sale, and suggested what We deemed the best
policy to be adopted at the time, to extricate
the State from her complications with the canal
contractors, and effectualy take care of the ca
mails for two years to come, during which time
We suggested that the question could be duly
considered, and definite policy adopted.
Fl Mr.. MARTIN opposed our views. He was i'm
pressed with the importance of bis new position
and inflated with the idea that he was to be the
dispenser official patronage and could NOTEBOOK
the idea of having taken from him the power ts
let Jobs and contracts, and appoint men to Office
'state management and "proper economy
we're to work wonders, and the canals were no
only to sustain themselves, but to pay into th,
treasury a handsome revenue. The two year
have expired, and the treasury can testify to th'
result. Mr.. MARTn and his colleagues hay'
had during this whole time, their estate man
agement," and Il would be unkind TO say tha
they had not used all "proper economy;" bu
the mainiainahos Of the canals has coat th'
State some $25O,0O0 more than they woult
have cost, had the policy we!then recommended
been adopted, instead Of that urged by Mr.
4 lMAHrrN, and which has been pursued during th'
time referred TO.
Last year the question WAS again up, but re-
IIieved from the complication with the old con.
tractors. We then urged the policy Of leasing
the Public Works, (which the Journal had urg
ed the year before) under . just and proper Law
TO bs enacted for that purpose. A responsible
company offered TO pay the State specific sun
(s2O, ,OOO) Per ysar, for the canals, and to bin'
themselves 70 keep them in good repair, and il
nayigable order, 10 the satisfaction of the Boar
lof Public Works. Mr.. MkErls. and others op
posed the leasing policy, and insisted that b
: q State management" and "proper economy
. the canals would sustain themselves and pa.
some revenue into the treasury. They wer
again triumphant, and the result Is ascortained
The Board reports the gross revenue from th
Public Works for the year (page 46 Of their re
0 port) at $3Os,9s5. The Treasurer Of State re-
/ porss the payments out Of the Treasury for thei
support for the same time, (page of his report
q s42l JOS 54-making the expenditures eI
essd fhs revenues, !, TO the amount Of sll2, 100 81
o sh;eh al the go 900 rent offered for the CO
psIs ~ Muszn, MiLLEE and RoEssos, ant
, We ssas ste m.s Of sl32,lso 81, which woul'
have bsss @ssS y ibs State, in the year jus
closed. had ne policy We advocated been adopt
N ed, instead Of NJ. MlrrH's estate manage
: ment /" and " proper seoaony," which did pre-
!. rail. w
10 addition 70 the amount paid on. Of th'
treaSury, during the year, the Auditor states OF