The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1870-08-30
For the Spirit.
Monroe COUNTY Infirmary.

MESSRS. EDITORS: In your issue OF
the 23d inst. find another letter signed
by Mr.. VIM. Read, as reply to my let
ter of the 4th. He says he thought he
would take your advice and write calmly
and coolly, and give the facts and fig
ures, SO the people might see for them
selves. Oh, how calmly oh,how coolly /!
and oh, how ignorantly! l believe Mr..
R. is honest enough in parts of his arti
cles, but OF, how ignorant he has proven
himself to be. Tax payers, what does
his last letter contain? Not one word
about the leaking roof; not one word
aboht the hauling Of wood (by ]. Fisher)
to town; not one word about wages paid
to hired hands not one word about the
strayed sheep; not one word about rails
ing the hogs on the Infrmary farm, and
the poor fattening them by their own
labor; but he starts off with statement
from Joshua Fisher, certifying that there
was but one shoulder out Of the so
worth of bacon, received from Pierson
and Bach, that was damaged. Now, l
demand that Joshua Fisher Se taken be-
fore a proper person and be sworn to the
effect that but one piece of said bacon
was spoiled: after which / will be quail
fed that Fisher told me, last spring, that
sthe Directors were to blame that the In
stitution costs as much as it does. For
instance: they bought $40 worth of ba-
con short time ago, and great por-
ton of it is spoiled; / have used it in
almost every way to get rid Of it; but
one shoulder had to be returned, so that
they could claim that the damaged bacon
was returned and the money refunded.
Now, how much money was refund
ed? Mr.. Pierson paid the Directors
IS 81 ; that was paid over to the Treas
urer. Hereceived per cent. for recciv-
ing and paying it out, which left the
county SS AZ for shoulder of bacon,
say 20 lbs. flor 1t was very heavy ba-
conl at 17Ac per h., which makes So 30
that from SIS AZ leaves 81 90 for one
barrel of flour got by Pierson, which l
think was bought from John 6oudy for
SlI per barrel. Mr.. r. may deny that
it cost S11, but / got it from parties who
know. Let the -four have cost what it
might, the principle is just the same.
Had they any right whatever to let any
one have flour?
He says that again charge him with
falsely saying that ever said in any OF
my letters that the paupers might be
kept for $40 per month. He says If he
SAID $40 he made this small mistake and
should have said $50. Now, Mr.. r.,
this is horse Of different color. Pau
pers is one word and 1nfrmary is anoth
er. They have different meanings
Now, taxpayers, look at his letter of
July Ia, in SPIRIT of July Is, and his
third sentence reads as follows: "He
thinks by good management the Infr-
mary might be kept In good order at an
expense of $40 per month" In his
next he says that I further denied ever
saying that I told the other Directors to
allow me just what they pleased for my
trips to the Infirmary, and tells you to
look back to my letter of July 26; to
commence at the 30th line from the top,
and you would find the following Ian
guage: 81 made no charge, but told them
to allow me just what they pleased" l
suppose Mr.. r. will permit the people to
commence, when reading ny letter Of
July 26, at the beginning OF the SEN
tence instead of the 30th line; they will
find the meaning of it entirely different
from what Mr.. r. makes it.
In his next sentence he says: "Mr. 5.
denies the amount of money that | sta
ted was in the treasury at the different
dates given in my former letter, and that
If bis statement is not true, then the
sworn statements of The Auditor and
Treasurer to the Commissioners are not
true" Now, gentlemen, have ! denied
anything of the kind? Did / not in my
last give the balances in the treasury at
the different dates since September L,
1862 But claimed, and do ityet, that
there were orders outstanding which he,
Mr.. f., had issued, sufficient to take
every cent of that balance in the treas
ury, when Mr.. r. went out of office. In
his next he says: GAS to the charges |
made against the old Directors for
amounts paid Superintendent, there
was nothing wrong in dates and amounts
Of orders given; there is no dispute IN
this matter ;all that is wrong is the igno-
rance or wilful Misrepresentation that
l make in not showing the people how
much of these. orders was paid for salary
and how much for oats, &c" In my
letter of duly 81, in SPIRIT of 26th, l
said that, Fisher received 1868 salary for
length OF time, when contract allowed
him but 1923 rs. Mr.. r. then, in his
letter of July 2S, in SPIRIT August 2,
says that Fisher received 1858 for sala-
ry, potatoes, oats, barrels and beans. 1
then in my last August 4 in SPIRIT 9th J
gave you the date and amount OF each
order as salary, making 1858. MI. 4.
in his last still persists that the 1868 in
|cludes pay for things bought from Mr..
Fisher. ! will now give the date and
amount of each order again. also the
date and amount of each order for the
articles which Mr.. r. claims are included
in the 1868:
June i. 1868, paid J. Spence for making
fence, S19
June l, 1868, paid J. Spence, salary l2S
Aug. 20, lSes, so
Totaiem't p'dspenos.4 mo- & days, 5000
Aug 20, '6S. pd Fisher part salary,$7 90
0a& = -. q n - fk Oh Qll