Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1869-08-26

EDITORs LEDGER: The appropriation
to Mr.. Woodland. County Attorney, when
first submitted for action, was one con-
corning which the Board Of Commission
ers had serious doubts. Mr.. Woodward's
claim was advocated by the legal pro-
fession; il was insisted that he had la
bored in the Leonard case from the begin
ming to the present time most indefat-
igably that he had gone to New York
al his own expense, in relation 10 said
case, and that IL was clearly not contem-
plated that his salary was fixed ct $500
TO embrace criminal cases as well as
civil, especially where there was involved
so much extra work. The ordinary du-
ties of his Office as County Attorney en-
gage the greater portion of his time;
attorneys services in this latitude are
rated exceedingly high; it was the opin.
ion Of some that he should be allowed $500
for extra services IN the Leonard case,
because it was q criminal proceeding. l
said could not vote for more than $3.50,
and this sum was unanimously allowed
him. Possibly the vote was an error;
yet knowing as well as do the amount
Of services Mr.. Woodward has rendered
in this case, think myselfthe vote given
was not an error. 1t is impossible, Mr..
Editor, that every man should think
exactly as every other man does. Ill
act eonscientiously in the discharge of
my duties and secure my own approba-
ton, the public, and you especially, Mr..
Editor, must excuse me if ! say this is all
that can be expected Of me. The world
will always differ; some men will ap.
prove, others will condemn. In the
great majority Of cases those who con-
denim would change their verdict if they
we're acquainted with all the facts by
which they should form their opinions.
In regard to the judgments against
the county for which tax has been
levied, this is my view of the matter
The county owes in round numbers four
hundred thousand dollars; q judicious
man agemsnt of the bonds would have re-
tired so much of this debt as that what
remained of warrants on the market
would have advanced to one hundred
cents on the dollar; the bill of injunction
has probably stopped effectually the issue
of these bonds; capitalists will doubtless
buy up the warrants end bring sqit
against the county TO pay such debt
there is no remedy but to levy taxi it
is better that this tax should be divided
and so levied % that the entire debt
should not fall upon the community in one
year; it seemed, therefore, more judicious
to me that this suit against the county
should beprovided for this year, otherwise
by postponipg it till next year, resisting
it as long as possible. as you suggest, the
tax for this suit and the tax for very
large number of other suits would be i'm
posed during the next year, and the bur-
den would be more than any of us could
bear; for l argue, in the present condi-
ton ofsfAirs, that before the levyins Of
taxes next year the greater portion Of
our county warrants will be sued for,
There is no other alternative. The bonds,
iudiciously managed, as said, would
have postponed this debt thirty years
it must now be paid within three years.
In conclusion, Mr.. Editor, l have to say
that shall take pleasure in answering
any respectful questions relative to what
/ know or what do as county official
it is questionable, however, whether | ana
required to answer auy from any source
that have an inyidious eoloring.
Respectfully, ]. e. MERRINAS.