New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-11-03
THE SERIOUS SIDE or MR.. BEACH,.

THE SERiOUS SIDE OF MN. DEdCH'
The showing made elsewhere of the record
of Mr.. Allen c. Beach in the Canal Board,
coming close upon the showing made OF his mile
age accounts, will add to the surprise of many
who had not had their faith shaken in his integ-
rity by his recent associations in the
politics of the State. In this respect
Mr. Beach has occupied peculiar
position. Although the favOrite candidate of
the worst element in his party, it has been urged
that his own character was above reproach that,
if he had rOgues among his supporters, other
good men had also; that no man could be
expected to reject votes because they were not
given with pure hands. Mr.. BeachS contrO-
versy with the Canal Commission only added
strength to this line of argument. The COM
mission did not accuse him Of corrupt COM
plicity in the fraudulent contracts which were
awarded while he was at the head of the Ca
nal Board but because by his own folly III
forcing quarrel with the commission he
placed himself on the same side with the
disappointed politicians and influential thieves,
who were assailing it at every point, his friends
thought that cruel injustice had been done him.
The commission had dragged him into the com
pany of thieves; they could not see that he
sisted that, if he had neglected his duty, to the
injury of the State, it was no more than many
of his predecessors had done, and could not
understand that neglect in an officer probably
works more general harm than actual cOrrup-
ton. Our Albany correspondence puts more
serious face upon this matter by showing that
the records OF the Canal Board disclose only
one instance in four years in which he voted
against a contractor. 1t proves him to have been
the steady servant of the Canal Ring, though
it does not prove that he was himself guilty of
corruption But this will. doubtless, be de-
Tended, as the mileage performance was before
Mr. Beach's own figures were adduced
against him. 1t will be said that the Lieuten
ant-GovernOr, good, easy man. could not know
about such things; he could only vote
as others voted. Most of these awards
were legal, if they were tainted with
fraud, and he could not alter the laws.
They were customary. They were legal.
Just so it was sald but with less truth, of
his mileage accounts. 1t was also said that
il was a very small matter. To this, we can
ONLY answer that If single crime can send
starving man to Jail, it is difficult to see why
it should need very many cases of construc-
Lieutenant Governor.
But the question is was his action honest or
decent IN either case2 When he sat sluggish in
his chair in the Canal Board and voted thou
sands and thousands of dollars, sometimes at
the rate of more than hundred thousand
day, into the pockets of men whom he knew to
be thieves and on claims which he must have
known were full of fraud, was he not lending
himself to cOrruptiOnY A great canal investiga-
ton was scarcely over when he entered the Canal
Board and the same men went on stealing,
and never failed to get Mr.. Beach's vote. Was
this keeping his Oath1 Take lock now AT the
otherrecord. When he charged mileage forjour-
news which he did not make, rs II seems evident
he did, was the money honestly his, or was 1t
stoen2 There is no compromise between these
positions. Either this was an honest charge,
or il was n theft Which does il look like
When he stated that he made a journey which
he had not made at all, was it the truth,
or notf 1t was either truth or falsehood.
Which does it look like Does the fact that
the amount involved was not very large alter
the morality of the actionY When the mem
bers of Congress voted themselves back pay
which they had not earned, were the
people any less lnulShaht DtcauSe tue
whole amount was less than an ener-
eetic ring would steal in a single contract
Indeed. is it not human TO look with
more respect upon a man VINO steals with
ability and courage than upon the Christian
statesman who takes petty Credit Mobilier
check with trembling fingers and wishes he
was not afraid to be as wicked as he would
like TO be
Mr. Beach's apologists do not appreciate the
plight IN which their excuses put him. They
ask us to excuse in him certain practices
which they admit newly awakened official mo-
ralty would not tolerate-this has been said in
these very words--and TO pardon him for a
gross neglect of his sworn duty, because he did
only as others had done. In other words, Mr..
Beach's code of morals in Office is that
which circumstances and precedents combine