The Conservative. (M'connelsville, Ohio) 1866-1871, 1868-03-19
A COMMUNICATION.
MACK.

troversy, especially with one who l
think should BIZ q friend, / nm COMPEL
ed, in consequence Of the repeated ma
llclous attacks upon me by the Editor
Of the Herald, to ask the indulgence Of
your columns to defend myself before
the public.
In the Herold, of February 81, after
printing the order of the Court, ut It's
last November term, appointing Jno.
e. Hanna and G.. G. Devol to m
tho report OF the County Commission.
ers, and order of the Court requiring
the Prosecuting Attorney to have tho
said report printed in lone of the pa
pcrs of the County" the Editor makes
the following remarks:
"When the Court issues orders, 1t is
presumable that it expects them to be
obeyed, ard, when MOI obeycd, it pun
ishes for contempt with fine, or fine
and Imprisonment. Why tho order IN
this instance, IN q matter Of such i'm
portance, has not been obeyed, the
people have a Iightto know, and it is
Nh. Stanbery's duty TO inform them.
If he may disregard an order OF the
Court, anyone may, and there is nm
end Of civil obedience"
Now, If Mr. Brown had really cause
to believe that 1 had violated IN order
ofthe Court, his proper remedy was
first to cause mo to be arra:gned for
the contempt, and, after proof that l
had willfully dIsoboyed an order Of
the Court, would have been a proper
time to arraign me before the readers
of tho Herald, and l then should have
had no cause to complain of his treat
ment. But, tho fact Is that Mr.. Brown
was informed by Mr.. M'Grew, tho Au-
ditor, and by Mr.. Alderman, the Clerk,
more than two weeks previous to the
publication of said article, that the
said report had been taken from my
office, either by mistakS or purpJsely
bysome unknown person, and that il
was beyond my power to have it pub
lished until a duplicate should be
made out by the Auditor, which would
require one weeks work by him
This l did not deem necessary to be
done al once, as the order does not re!
qulre the report to be published at or
before any specific time, and l hoped
to find the missing papers in which
event, this extra labor would DO saved
to the Auditor. In reference to the
missing papers the facts are that Judge
Hanna and MIR. Devol made their OK
animation during tho latter part Of
January, and Judge Hanna took the
report, together with last years report,
to his Office to write out a report to
be made By Mr.. DevOl and himself
This had been written and signed by
the Judge, when l called nj his Office
and 60: the papers for the purpose OF
having Mr.. Devol sign 1t, and then
have it printed. took the papers to
my office and laid thcm in my Office
table drawer. Within two days l
took Mr.. Devol to my Office TO sign the
report, when, upon examination, l
found thOy were not where l had laid
them. Supposlng that Judge Hanna
or MIR. M'Grew had taken them in my
absence f,om tho Office, l Immediate
ly called upon those gentlemen to as.
certain that fact, and was informed
that they had not. All the papers
were tuken--last years report and
this and that fact makes mo think
thoy were taken p%urposely, and. per
haps, malicious.y by whom, | have nc
idea; but l would have az much right
to charge the Editor o fthe Herald with
taking them, (Which l do not believe
US he has 10 insinuate that they are
not "really'' lost.
On the 22d of February, l met Mr.
Brown and asked him his motive il
making the publIcation-sayirg 10 hin
that no knew the papers wero lost
that Mi. MGrew Lad told him so, anC
that l thought he should have Spoken
TO mo before he had printed IN articl,
rejecting upon my official conduct
He did not deny but that Mr.. M'Grev
had told him Of the loss of tho papers
but he very meanly insinuated tina
the papers were not lost. l then sal,
, to him that l did not choose to sup
. port a man who would thus malicious
ly treat me-saying 10 him that l be
: Iieved he did it to crafty his persona
! malice, and that, unless an apolog
|. wag made, I should withdraw nv pa