Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1870-08-19

MT. bonhltSOn mas II SND-enHlnetE duu Auiuh ne
pays his assistant so 80 per day and board, or
find him while at work. Says he thinks lcager
did not know of Lees acct; think ho did know
OF Bissell Il Goirill's acct as u was on file sOmo
time before paid. Don't know Of any bill or at-
torney claim whatever that have been handed to
any member of the board Of commissioners.
After your committee had called upon Mr.. st.
John for his reasons In pre3uming they had the
power under the general law to pay the engineer
on bitches s. per day when the ditch law ex-
pressly says SO, he replied that they had not
examined tile law closely, but that Mr.. Donald
son their engineer, had told them that was the
law. In a further examination OF Mr.. Donald
son, the engineer on bitches, lie said that he had
formerly supposed that the engineer was enh-
tied to So per day, but that ho was now satisfied
that the law only allowed So, and that in future
he would make out his accounts accordingly.
IMPROVED ROAD no. 4.
Complaints having been made to your commit
tee that bonds had been issued by the commits
sinners on said road within the last year for pur.
poses of doubtful validity, with request that we
examine into same we deemed IL our duty TO do
so. In the papers Of said road No. we find a
petition on file for above road without date and
without a filing thereon. Petition does not state
that they are resident landowners docs not say
that they are majnrity, Mr.. st. JOAN saws he
cannot tell on what evidence, if any, they found
them as per record Of the petitioners being resi-
dent landowners. 1lasno recollectons about IT,.
In relation 10 bond. there Is no condition in II Of
any kind. But the finding Of the commissioners
is different. Mr.. st. John, after examination of
bond, says their finding was wrong rs he now
sees from the papers. There is no time in no.
tice of the hearing Of the report of committee
befure the commissioners, ut the auditors office,
and could not have had jurisdiction OF the case
There is no notice on file of order to viewers
There is purported report of viewers, but IL is
not made under oath and has no date There Is
Al .n-ls Il
provement, but il does show private benefit.
There is no definite description Of the lands that
will! be benefttcd By the Improvement. There
is no proof that the viewers NIT on the day
named in the record and no time fixed when they
did meet. Says they met on the day named in
the order, but there is no evidence Of that fact.
The commissioners report SAYS no damages were
claimed or assessed. The papers show that
claims were presented but not allowed Mr.. st.
John says Mr.. Donaldson was appointed super
intendent Of the work, and made the contract
with NJ. Hayes for doing the work on most Of this
road, he being the contractor of most OF the jobs.
The second report is without date, and no evil
dence that the awarding viewers acted under
oath, and does not show any particular amount
to portion OF each specific tract embraced in
the report of viewers. There is no order on flc
empowering the viewers 10 go on aud award oI
apportion expenses to lands benefited, simply a
journal entry.
road No. 4, that he took the contract from D7u'
aldson, the engineer. Donaldson was not re-
moved or changed by my consent. He says ht
thinks ten men two days would have finished the
wCrk on his contract. Saws, in 1868, he put the
ditch one foot lower than Keeer made the ouil :
Donaldson examined the work in the fail Of lS6 :
| He said he need not make Il any wider. Thinks
he took his contract in August, 1867. Says thai
| the taking of one half % the water away, or Of
| as unGe the contract with keeler, was Of no ac-
| count whatever.
The commission find that for the purpose o.
| getting an outlet for the water of improved road
| No. 4, the commissioners gave Coleman kecel
bonds on said road To the amount Of $3.50 for
| right Of way through part Of the farm on whicl
| he resides, in which to carry Oae-hoT Of the wa
ter of said road. Afterward they gave him s50t
more in bonds Of said road to take all the watei
| of said road. And still later they gave him, a:
| president of the hydraulic canal into which III,
| outlet above referred to emptics, $3.50 in bond.
| for taking care of the water in the canal, W.
| are informed by the former owner of the farm
| that the outlet ditch when it is located, is ben
eft rather than damage Of 1850 to said farm
| In this expenditure, TO use mild expression, W,
/ think there is great lack of good business sense
| The county in all probability will have to pay
| other and may be greater damages than thos,
now incurred without being able to get back any
| part Of that now paid. Your committee find OF
| a careful examination general carelessness OF
| slackness in the transaction of tho county bust
| ness, not only BY the commissioners, but by thu
| auditor. For instance, we find that the proceed
| ngs of the commissioners at the regular session
| in September, 1859, is only partly recordet anC
| is not yet signed, at March /, 1870. We iuC
| that the commissioners had a special session il
| November, a regular session in December and
| special session in February, and there is MT
single word or line in their Journal of said fact
| or what was done then and there. There MAJ
| he minutes Of business transacted at said meet
| ings to make future records from. AS before re
marked, we believe the commissioners speak Il
the tax payers and others interested only through
| their records, and when these records are blanl
| and six months in arrears their is but little sat
isfaction in their examination by parties inter
| ested. We think all official business transacte,
/ by board of commission RS should be recOrle,
| on the day on which the same is performed, an,
\ th journal read and approved either at the clos
of the day or the next morning before any othe
| business is done by them. We would therefor
recommend that the commissioners, at all time
! and under all circumstances have the jOurna
| of their proceedings read, corrected, approves
| and signed by them before separating or adjourn
| ing. Any other practice win render their act
| very uncertain and unsatisfactory, for all me-
| are liable to forget what has cen done month
| after the thing has transpired II a memorAn
dun is kept, by the auditor, of the Official busi
| ness OF transactions of the commissioners, as
| basis for the record in the journal, he may still
have overlooked something Of importance tina
| has been ordered or done, which the daily read
| ing and examination would have recalled to min
whereas, il it was deferred two, three or fou
months it would never be thought of, and the
.herc would be only an imperfect record of the
proceedings. The committee know that undJ
proceedings Of former commissioners aud audit,
their suggestions here made have been full
complied with and carried into successful prat
tice. They know that the Journal Of evey sc;
sion was read daily, corrected it necessary. al
proved and signed before separating, and til
should be the practice now. The pros. attorne
Mr.. Canary, was requested to jDn us in this c!
animation, but excused himself from doing 5
lie was part Of two or three days, eamiuir
some of the testimony on the sheets, and Ia
read the greater part of this report, has neith'
as sented n ir dissented to same in our pr 3senc
The commission know this to be only a me-
gre report TO what might be made, and what v
probably would have made had not the priva
business of the committee been 50 pressing til
we could not give it more time than wo have do
The witnesses examined before us undcr su
, ptpna from clerk of the court were
S. w. st. John, 2 days. John RGssell, d:
John Yeager, ID. Donaldson, 2
CIV Evers, " J.W W.Brownsberger |
. j. A. Bonuell, l f. fuller,
: G. G. Phelps, j. b. Newton,
Geo. Weddell, l NJ. laves,
z. Witzler, l j. H. Roid,
: IL. Lundy, day.
We would respectfully ask the court TO exaI