The Kalida venture. [volume] (Kalida, Ohio) 1841-1865, 1845-03-28

Sprague Ou8nt lo DC 1IenoVou, was DSCdu9c
he had used the funds of the road for his
own private purposes, and that he had so
held and used them when they were due to
contractors, and without the consent of the
other trustee. He says in this respect |
have lied most foully in my tbroat;" such
language is unworthy of any gentleman, and
severe application of raw hide would
be perhaps the most effective remedy; but
Dr. Franklin says that we should never re-
sent the lie, because no gentleman will give
it. l will, therefore, 60 to the proof and The
facts. A few days previous to the session
of the Court IN this county, in Sept. 1874,
Sheriff Gillaspie called upon Col. Sprag!ue
for the amount of an execution against him
of about $l40, on which specie had been
demanded by Plfs. Atty. The COL told him
that he expected TO receive a sum OF money
in specie from J. P. Wyatt at Bryan when
he went out 10 Court, and would then pay it
off. Now, Col, want to ask you a few
questions, and would advise you to walk up
like a man and confess the truth, and save
your friends the modification of making a
public statement of the whole matter, as
they have very reluctantly made verbal
statement. Did you not draw one hundred
and thirty-two dollars - cts. in specie from
the Co. treasury, of funds belonging TO the
Ottawa, Defiance and West Buffalo free turn
pike road, on the first day of the term of the
last Sept Court, and carry the same in a
pocket handkerchief to j. P. Wyatt's store.
and receive from him ten dollars,-and nc
more-then carry it TO Langle's hotel and
guard it through the night, and in the morn
ing request Martin Thrall to pay it over &c
the Sheriff? and after being relieved from
your charge, did you not express your joy
and say you hoped that it might canse G. W
B. Evans as much care as it had you? ane
was you not present when the money was sc
paid over TO the Sheriff? Col, the circum
stances here referred to wore matters of pu
bic notoriety Immediately after they occur
red, and heard it remarked by a number o
persons during the Court, that it was very
convenient 10 have public funds 10 pay o!
such claims, especially when the specie wa:
demanded. Now, Col, when did you re-
place this money and apply it TO the pur
poses of the road? In your report you re
present il as having been expended in lS43
but, Col, that is another mistake of yours
Did you not credit it TO the account of No
bic & A. Haymaker for goods you SOLE
them last fall, and get their receipt for it OF
their contract about the time you were fix
ing up your patch work 10 60 TO Columbu
this winter? Yet by the report it was eS
pended in 1913! Does not this look lk
using the money for private purposes?
Further, this $Ss27,9O, expended in Henr
CeGnty,in in ls43,
This contract in Henry County was mad
Jan. lS45, between Sprague, or the Roa
Com'rs, and McCully g. Herlin. Spragu
had an old debt against Herrn for tn
r amount, of $27,9O, which it was rather dl
, ficult TO collect, and required McCully {
Ierlin 10 receipt on the contract for IN
? amount of that account, at the time the col
$ tract was signed, and before any of the VOL
had been performed. And this the final
ciering Col. calls advancing TO poor col
2 tractors, TO enable them TO 60 OH with the
: works. 1t looks 10 me very much like usln
t the funds of the road for the purpose of CO
, lecting bad debts, especially when this nj
ney is exhibited as having been expended
1913. Magnanimous Col. Sprague! not
charge any thing for services which hav
ben SO very beneficial 10 the road. 9th
, fund has been managed with the most rigi
, economy, and whenever contracts could b
let to advantage, the Commissioners hay
, always embraced the opportunity" Tru'
r o, Colonel! This part of your report
t true indeed!
: In relation to the Sd reason stated in II
b petition, why sprague ought to be remove
Il / have only to say that at the earnest solic
alton of Noble and A. Haymaker, | assist'
v Gel. Sprague in drawing the plan and spec
). fications for the bridge, and was preso
q when the contract was made and know tn
k Loyd's name was not used in the contract
IF any manner. Sprague stated to me that
II had not consulted Lloyd on the subject,
i the reason that he knew that he would G
.e pose it. It's notorious that Lloyd disclaim
it having any thing 10 do with that contra'
+ that he had not been consulted in the matte
~ that he was opposed TO building the brid
v. at that time; that he thought that other pa
IS of the road needed the money much mo
in This contract was not signed by Lloyd un
lie Just as sprague was preparing to make
I'd defence at Columbus. In relation 10 the
r. being bridge convenient and safe 10 Gro
AS | have only to state that there was a go
it substantial bridge few rods above. 1t
v. true that the west abutment had been S
IN Ting for some time, which made it necessl
d; to place single " bent'' at that end, VIII
IF I had contracted TO have done for the sum
e. S25,0O, and the materials were prepared a
I'll ready to be put in when the new bridge v
of nut under contract, | so informed Sprae Q