Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1864-12-12
DAILY LEADER
what Geauza County has D0ns for
cur Soldiers. = = = -
CHARDoS, Dec. 5, 1854

CHARDoS, Dec. 5, 1854.
EDITOR CLEvELAHp DAILY LKADER
DEAR sIR-In your issus Of December
ID, your Columbus special correspondent
in letter dated Columbus, Decomber Ist
says the reports of the County Auditors
ss far as received by the Auditor Of State
show that some Of. the strong Union eoun'
ties have paid less for the support Of The
families of their soldiers than many Of the
Copperhead Cosnties, and that HOLMES
has paid more than Lorain or Geaugs.
As this statement is calculated TO carry
70 She public the impression that GeAugs
and other Union Counties sre not maxim z
as liberal provision for those families as
some Of the counties that have been cast.
ing a majority of their votes against the
Union, and, as I do not believe the same
to be correct, wish to make reply.
L your correspondent in possession Of
any statistics, showing that Geauga is not
providing as literally for her Soldiers
families" Is Holmes or snY other county,
Is he aware that the number of soldiers
from county is no correct criterion BY
which TO estimate the necessary amount to
be paid for the proper support Of these
families A State levy for this purpose
operateI very much like the school levy,
some counties pay into the State treasury
more thsn they receive back, others much
less. la
As Holmes and Geauga were designated,
viii take them for illustration. In 1860,
Holmes had 8 population Of 20,5s4;
GeaugR 1870. In 1868 the total value of
property in Holmes was $6,s542s4;
Gesuga, $,l45, 339. In the same year,
Holmes County received from the State
school funds 81, ,4l6 more than she paid in
TO the State treasury, while Geauga reoeiV-
ed 81, ,Oo6 less.
The relief fund operates much the same
way. It is paid in by the dollar, and is
drawn out by the number of soldiers in the
service. This is right The soldiers, as
well as their children, are the property Of
the State, and should be provided for by
general fund. Still, it shows that car
tain levy for either purpose will make
better provision for schools or soldiers'
families las the case may be- in some
eountIes than In Others; or, in other words,
that, in some counties there is more prop
erty in proportion to the number of chill
dren or Decessilious families than in other,
1t has been the intention of the Estate
Legislature 10 make the State School levy
large enough to approximate near the
amount required by the several counties;
giving the local Boards authority to make
such additional levies as they might deem
proper. Now, if one locality makes levy
of two and another one mill, it should not
be inferred that the children are better sd-
ucated in the former case
So with the relief levy the Legislature
has endesvored to make it sufficient to
meet the wants Of the grestest possible
number Of counties, giving to county com-
missioners power TO make such levies, in
addition to the State levy, as they might
deem necessary to ensure the comfortable
support of the soldiers families in their
respective counties.
The State levy of 1863 gave more money
TO some counties than they required; TO
others, less. It will no doubt be so under
the levy of 1864. Some counties we're ex-
pected 10, and no doubt die, make larger
levies than others. This, of i.self, does not
not show that these families are better
provided for in any one county, but rather
shows that there are more necessitous fami-
lieb in proportion 10 the number Of soldiers;
that some families send more young men
having no families-into the field than |
Others. This, by most people, is well un-
derstood. In this county, for instance,
there have been times when in ons
township there were twelve families re-
luiring assistance while in another, with |
an equal number of men in the service, |
and larger amount of property on the |
duplicate, there were only three necessitous |
families. Now, if these families had been
provided for by the townships, if two mills |
0n the dollar would have answered in the |
former case, one-hslf CT one mill would |
have made a better provision in the latter |
In zoos, uOlnaoe county levied, Tor county |
purposes, one mill; Gesugs, one-halfof one |
mill. In the same year Holmes paid q |
poor tax of $2,l6S; Geauga $6l5. But,
Toes this show that Holmes county Is any |
better managed, or her poor any better |
jared for, than in Geaugs?
Yours, with much respect,
B. B. WOODBURY..