Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1868-10-01

that OF paying a bounty to her
white Boys in Blue" who went to
war, and the fund that year expend-
cd for that purpose was S62, 225 20.
Glorious, generous little Porter
When Marshall's patriotic sons Shout
dered their muskets and marched to
the front, they went with empty
pockets so far as she was concern
cd, with one exception. The only
bounty or county ever paid was or
dered by q Republican Board OF
Commissioners. The Sons of Liber
ty (abettors ofthe rebellion who af-
forwards controlled the county, new
or offered a cent to our brave boys
in bountics. Other more liberal
minded, patriotic Boards, offered
bounties and got our men. Many q
poor man was thus compelled to sell
his little home and hire substitute
or 90 himself, and all this because
the Sons of Liberty of this county
would rather have him do so than
offer a small bounty, to raise which
would have been light tax on all.
No, they preferred that money should
accumulate in the County Treasury
for the use and benefit Of the clique
and its satellites, and to make illegal
loans.
In the Democrats great array of
figures the above large sum was no
part Of the expenditures Of 1867. The
township. special school, road and
dog taxes, amounting to about $685.
600 in the report alluded to, arc
simply charged to and then placed to
the credit Of the County Treasurer,
and do not in any manner determine
or show what were the expenditures
Of the county. 1t is only the differ
ence IN the method of making out
the Anditor's reports that makes the
difference in the figures, and this
fact the Democrat knows. Marshall
county collects township, special
school, road ard dog taxes, but her
veraeiCus Auditor docs not show
them in his report. Where are they
and what are they? What have you
done with these taxes you collect in
Marshall county and YOU make no
report OF? You say they are quite
large in Porter.
From the report Of the Auditor Of
Porter County, we copy this: Amt
credited by order of Commissioners
to cover discrepancy in the reports
of the Auditor and treasurer existing
for many years 1857 0S. This dis
crerancy, existing for many years, no
doubt occurred when Porter was dem
ocratic, and needs no further eXpla-
nation. The large amount Of receipts
and expenditures mentioned in the
Porter County Auditors report was
not collected i'm 81, nor were the
expenditures made that year, anil the
Marshall COUNT tax eaters know it.
In the year 1867. the rate of tax
ton for county and township pnrpo-
ses, in Porter was ninety cents on
the one hundred dollars; in Marshall
County the rate was one hundred and
nine cents on the one hundred dol
lars These are facts and figures all
can understand. Now, Democrats.
ifyour self-styled leaders will DELHI
erately misrepresent the facts in re-
gard to one or two important mat
tiers, how much credit onght YOU to
give their statements when you know
it is to their interest to have you be-
lieve a thing that is Improbable
They are in bad strait, and are de-
termined to lie out OF it if they can.
They know the rates Of taxation in
this and adjoining counties are as we
have published them
After all, the cliqucs argument in
in the Democrat amounts only to this:
'Jf Porter County steals 800, 900
a year, can't we steal the small sum
Of $50. OOO?"