The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1860-03-29
WHO'S ssTROUHsLED"!

Under the head of troubled our revcrcd friend
and admirer, in his last issue, discoursed very
unanimously. When he wrote that word 'troub-
led he thinking ofthe situation he had got
ten himself into, by prczaturely attacking Mr..
Packard for things that Mr. Corbaley, the Repub-
lican ex-Clers, guilty of TO much greater
extent than the Object of his wrath. He did this
because he thought lie had found ga good thing for
the Republican party and never dreaming that
any body would give the true statement of the
matter. In as brief manner as possible, we gave
TO our readers in issue of the 18Th, what we
thought were the facts in the case, and that our
neighbor regards them as being SUCH is evinced by
the long and pointless article he has written a. an
answer to article referred to. He occupied
almost an entire column, III small type, before he
Appropriated toward point His object was
undoubtedly to divert the mind of the reader from
the plain statement of facts. which he SAYS are
stubborn things, and has triei to cover them up BY
long, complex and complicated sentences, that he
could scarcely read so to be understood. This
was not done because he could not have been more
explicit, but because this style suited him better
In short, it just the article he wanted to write,
To do both he AMI our readers Justice we quote
all the arguments he made in the whole produc-
ton. Some other of his remarks in regard to our
self we may notice elsewhere. "Here is the point.
friends as his friend Fuller would saw, and we
hope our readers will keep sharp look out for il,
for fear it will be like all this last named gentle
mans points that he is always "point'ing at,
but nobody sees, but, digress-''here s the
point:
All that the Democrat saws about Mr.. Coraley',
indebtedness may NAV not he true for all that
we know. Upon inquiry we learn that something
over four hundred dollars have be, N found stand
ing against him. up to this time, but that he Claims
that some of the itms in the list are erroneous,
that the records of the office show that the money
was never in his hands, and that for the most of
the balance he has vouchers in his possossion-
When the true amount of his Indebtedness is as
certained shall not be backward about stating it
The reason we did net speak of the matter soon
er was because nothing definite was known con
corning il. Much might be urged in excavation
OF Mr. Corbaey's neglect to paw over monies in
bis hands as the law requires, which cannot ia JUS
tice be urged in regard to his successors neglect
Mr. COrbaley was unceremOniouslv and unexpect-
cdly driven out OF his Office while claiming that
he still had nineteen months to serve under his
commission, and consequently had no opportunity
TO ascertain how much was in his hands that the
law required him TO pay to the County Treas
urer, and when he afterwards sought an opportuni-
" to ascertain the amount. well as the amounts
in his hands belonging to different persons hc was
told by Mr.. Packard TINT he would rather he
would take different course.-That If he would
stop the Investigation he (P) would paw the amounts
the records might show in his hands when
Called Tor by the proper persons, and he (C) might
afterwards pay him. This is Mr.. Corialcv's ex-
PLANTATION which We give in Justice to him. Mr.
al, 81,
and had ample tlrae to make out and file with the
Treasurer of the county complete list of all the
fines, jury fees and unclaimed witness fees i'm his
possession, as the law positively required He
failed to do Was not this an extraordinary
omission for "the best Clerk Marshall County ever
had" To be guilty of But, saws the Democrat,
the charge that Mr.. Packard had ''rctained un-
lawfully, fees and monies received by him while
CLERK, Is ga malicious Misrepresentation, for we
are informed that the law allows the Clerk to re-
tain such monies and settle UP his own affairs -
His informant, like himself, we presume never
read the law.
lie virtually acknowledges what We stated to be
true. but first hal to say it might or might not be
true. AID they had to say that something over
four hundred dollars had been found standing
against" Mr.. Corbaley, but claims that "some of
the itens in the list erroneous and that the
records of the Office show that the money was new
er in his hands If the record does not show that
il was in MS hands, what does? Look at this fab
rication. He first saws that over zoos have been
found standing against him; secondly, that the
records erroneous and thirdly that the record.
Of the Office show that the money was never in his
hands,. This docs not need any comment. If
the contradiction is not plain enough to be seem it
isbecause the reader does not want to see, and
these are the blindest people that ever did live
The record was found to have over 800 aqainst
him, and the reeord showed that the money had
never been in his hands. We think this is can ar
gument deduced from highly Objectionable logical
premises as he elegantly said OF our article
We should think that Mr. Corbaey would be pre-
sentiug these receipts and vouchers, and have the
matte: Strengthened up get the prope. credits on
the record and be dOne.with the matter. Howev-
err thisis business of ours, but we think strange
that he does not.
Our friend and adnirer says that VIII IN he finds
out the amount Of Mr.. Cortaley's Indebtedness
he will not be allow in stating it. We fear that he
will not get it very soon, and if he does at all it
will probably be after matters are Strengthened up
well possible. for, by the partial course he
has taken between these two gentlemen he has
given room to think that he will make it just as
black as he can for Mr.. Packard and just as white
as he can for Mr.. Corbaley. No person who can
read. is dull Of perception that they cannot see
that it all gotten up for political purposes,
else, why did the republican Board of Commission-
er. entirely overlook 1--WE don't mean look orer ,
the record of Mr.. Corbaley and examine that of
Mr. Packard; and who does not believe that, had
itnot been referred to by the Democrat, that the
Republican would have ever mention cd that Mr.
Corbaley was all in arrears? As to the neglect
Of his successor this is the merest fabrication for
who does not know that the editor of the Republi-
can would be the last individual to expose the
smallest neglect rs AN attempt to embezzle. This
i.no,hing. tie says that Corbaley was unceremo
niously driven out Of the office. This is no OK
ruse, his agent, s b Corbsley, for onths after