The Portsmouth inquirer. [volume] (Portsmouth, O. [Ohio]) 1849-1855, 1855-01-19
F'KiNNEF,
One of the Directors for Scioto Co.

pretty freely in the article alluded to above,
| feel it my duty to make few statements,
for the benefit of the public, and yourself
in particular, having the promise that you
would publish them.
AS Treasurer of the Board in this Couh-
ty, have never refused any stockholder
any information asked for in regard to the
finances of said road, and have made my
reports to the President of the company
annually, as required. After the resolu-
ton of the City Council, appointing Mr..
Newman as one of the committee onclaims,
to make the enquiries set forth in said res.
olution, that gentleman called on me, and
received all the information asked for; at
the same time exhibited the books for
his inspection. Had you, as public jour-
nalist, desired information in order to make
true statements to those concerned, you
could have been accommodated also. In
regard to your statement, "thatit is known
there has been for some time in the hands
of the directors considerable amount of
money, and it is believed has been used
in the private business of certain of these
directors, contrary to the express provis4
ions Of the law, DC. &c." To my know
ledge, there is not word of truth in the
declaration, at least in this county---all the
funds received at the toll.gate is paid into
the. treasury by the toll-gate keeper, and
receipted for by myself; and all orders
drawn for materials and repairs, are drawn
by the superintendent or one of the other
directors, and paid by me, and receipts
taken on the order, all of which orders are
numbered and on 1ile Any gentleman can,
by calling on me, satisfy himself AS to
the statement that the honest director was
told, by the treasurer, ,.that the board never
troubled themselves about vouchers, the
reply to his enquiries were, thatth board
of directors settled their own accounts, and
drew their order on the treasurer that as
treasurer, had nothing to do in their bu-
siness but receive the orders, which were
my vouchers. This conversation was after
the election, so that this Gould not be the
cause of his being marked man. As re-
CARDS the statement that voted the coun
ty and city stock, which l had not the least
shadow of authority for so doing, is not the
fact. The county was not represented,
nor the stock voted by any one, at the late
election I; the city stock ! represented and
voted by proxy, signed by the President
of the City Council-said proxy is now in
my ossession--and the representation |
made to the stockholders was, that we
wanted the same gentlemen elected and
appointed who had served the past year.
As regards the statement that this coun-
lty, by their commissioner, had subscribed
5000 to the stock, is not true. The
amountuf the county subscription is So
600; and | have been informed by the
Auditor, that when you inquired Of him,
he stated to you that $4,000 was the a
mount after such information. cannot
understand why it should have grown to
the amount of 500, 900 between the court
house and your Office, as you appear to be
very positive in your assertions.
4, With reference to the fat salaries, and
for extra labor, which the officers of the
road has had, for your information, and
through you to the public, will give
statement for the last five years.
l1QE0 .-....t