The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1859-09-20

eets, also2 and Why then are they not put
down In the list Of county assets to meet LA
bilitiesp Simply because the idea is absurd;
and it is no less absurd to include the Coun-
| ty Poor House and Farm.
Then let us strike out this as improperly
| listed in the Assets to meet liabilities,
$3l, 10000
| And strike Oh, also, as entirely
unavailable, the tax lists Of '55
and ,5e, amounting to 4,207.77
Making total deduction Of -$35, 707.77
And leaving Assets, including fees due and
tax lists Of '57 and '5s fairly set down to the
amount Of $24,140.4l.
That is very astounding difference yet,
even that is unquestionably more than the
actual available assets to meet liabilities will
ever yield. Well, just there ends this pre-
cious exhibit. Whether the county was in
debt fifty thousand dollars at the open
ing Of the financial year, or whether
it had hundred thousand dollars cash in
the Treasury does not appear from this ex-
hibit, nor does any citizen Of this county out
side of the "Court House clique" know any
thing about it, nor is any one likely to, till
that nest is broken up and the old "setting
hens" are driven of.
Moreover, and this 10 grave matter, the
County Judge does not show in this Exhibit
the amount of indebtedness incurred by him
during the year for which his Exhibit is made,
nor does he show any part Of it. 1t 10 ru.
mored that he borrowed eight thousand dol.
lars; and we find an item in the Exhibit for
the payment of interest, which may apply to
that debt or to county orders, generally, for
all that appears. Besides, it is notorious
that Court house has been purchased and
a debt Of some SIC, 900 or $l5, 900 incurred
for the original purchase and improvements
thereon. Not cent Of all this Indebtedness,
nor of any other, except those for which
warrants had been issued, appears in the Ex-
hibit.
Indeed, the Judge does not profess to rem
der an account of the indebtedness Of the
county nor to comply with the provisions of
the code on the subject at all. He appends
q certificate to the Exhibit to the effect that
it is statement of the "Receipts and Ex-
penditures," but says not word about debts.
Yet the law provides, expressly, not only for
. statement Of "Receipts and Expenditures, -
but also Gan account OF all debts due, and
payable by, the county"
The Exhibit is gross and deceptive hum
bug from beginning to end it don't meet
the object Of the law by affording infor-
nation to the people, nor does it comply with
the law by giving an account of tho financial
condition Of the county. The aim and pur-
pose Of the Exhibit, 10 the shape il lie got up,
lie to conceal from the people everything that
they ought to know, not only by withholding
the information which the law requires the
County Judge to give, but by making such q
voluminous tumble Of what is given that no
citizen Of the county could ever afford to
take the time and trouble to try to understand
it. And it de6es the comprehension of any
man to understand ithowmuchsoeve he may
studyit. For instance, we find items am cunt.
ing to $1,000, paid to Guy Wells, on Sugar
Greek Bridge, but whether that is in full, or
whether the bridge cost $4,000 or $26, 900
don't appear in the Exhibit; and there is like
uncertainty in regard to almost everything
else.
The interests OF the people demand a
change in the County Judgeship and thor
ough overhauling of the affairs Of the Office
and of the county. We say again no man
knows the condition Of county affairs and no
man can know because the Judge does not
comply with the provisions Of the law. ANY
change would be for the better, for We hold
it would be difficult to find worse judge than
the one who made out the County Exhibit, il
we are to take that as the exposition and in
dex of his character and policy.
NTWe publish . communication from d
+. Miller, to-day, upon which we can spare
space for but . paragraph or two Of com.
ment.
In the paragraph Of last week to which hs
alludes, we did not charge that be opposed
our candidates and wrote against them, bu
simply stated that it was understood in tn,
community that he had done 90. And, Y.
inferred, that a. that fact did not damag.
the candidates, his open opposition in tb.
Piaindealer was not likely to have any ruin
Gus effect upon them. II he did not oppos,
them, or write against them, the community
have done him injustice in the premises.
MIR. Miller thinks we are too jealous in tn,
advocacy Of the candidates Of our party
Since when have we become 20 I? He mad
no such complaint during the many years v,
labored for him and his personal friends.--
he thinks We ought not to suggest the slight
est objection to his denunciations in th,
piniudenllr Of two Of tina hast man IN an,