Western Reserve chronicle. [volume] (Warren, Ohio) 1855-1921, 1870-04-27

Is found on page loO oil the laws of that
wear. At the session of 1867. it ap-
pearing that in many instances there
were balances of these funds in the
township treasures not being used
for the purposes for which raised, an
act was passed, found on page so of
that wears laws, "tO transfer and op-
propriate" these funds, and in 1868 a
similar act, found on page ia, was
passed for the same purpose. Also,
by the appropriation act of 1867 there
was a transfer to General Revenue of
an amount of balances and collections
from delinquent taxes. The DISPOSE
ton of the levy for 1865 was as fol-
lows: Distributed to counties by act
of March Is, 1866, 81, ,l53, ,S51 46; tenn
poralIy transferred to Sinking Fund
| $500. 600: appropriated to Soldiers
Home ST5. 900, and transferred to Gen.
eral Revenue by appropriation act of
1865, So, ,0O9 26. in the aggregate S2,-
OSS, $50 -. The amount actually trans
| ferred by acts for State purposes was
| $3.50, ,009 20. As to the amount trans
ferred under the distribution and
transfer act of April 6, 1866 and the
acts for transfer of balances in town
ship treasures, passed in 1867 and
1868, there is no data by which to de-
termine, but it is safe to say that an
aggregate of a much larger amount
must have been transferred in this
way, Judging from the very large bal
ance remaining in the various treasu-
ries before the distribution of the ST.
l63. .S41 46 spoken of above.
The principle involved in all these
/ 4 hn ls
use of money for q different purpose
| than the one for which raised, and SO
used, because not needed for such orig
inal purpose. The fund was regarded
by all parties as a lapsed fund and
men of all parties aided in supporting
some or all of these various measures
of transfer. The only question about
which men differed was, whether the
money should be used for general pur-
poses in payment of the State debt, or
be sent back to the counties for local
expenditures. 1t was urged, and with
force, that being money raised by q
general tax upon all the property of the
| State, no better use of it could be made
than its application TO the State debt
which all the property of the State
must pay. Still, to guard against any
failure to provide for the wants of
those for whom it was originally rails
ed, very much the larger portion of it
was sent back to the counties, and
there really used for local expendi-
| lures.
1t was before said that all parties
united in making these transfers.
Upon the passage of the bill tempo
rarily transferring the SSO0,000, no
Democrat voted aye, but two of the
who were members of the Committee
IN Finance advised to this as the best
thing to be done with the money al
| though as partisans they might have
TO vote against it, which they did,
but afterward, they with sixteen 9TH
er Democrats of the House voted for
| the appropriation bill containing this
item of $500, 900 described as trans
erred from the Soldiers Relief
| Fund" Any one desirous of eXamin-
| ing the record of this vote will find
| it upon page 423 II. J., 1866, and
! among the names will be found Messrs.
CASTOR and Heller, of the present
House, and Hibbs, now in the Senate.
By a reference to page 4S4, same jour-
nal, it will be seen that twenty Demo
Gratis voted aye on the passage of the
distribution and transfer act of April
| 5, 1866. Also by reference to page SO,
| n. j., 1867, it will be seen that on the
passage of the transfer act, found on
page 50 of the laws of that year, thir-
Ity Democrats voted aye and not one
| in the negative. The same bill passed
The Senate unanimously, every Demo-
rat present voting for it. On the pas
sage of the appropriation act in 1867,
containing a section making the per-
manent transfer of the $50, ,009 26 be-
ore referred to, twelve Democrats in
the House voted aye, and in the Sen
Ite there was the same corresponding
vote. On the passage of the transfer
act of 1858, page IA, of the laws OF
that year, every Democrat in the
House but one voted aye, and upon
examination of the vote on page 59l
of that years journal, are found the
| following names of Democrats in the
present House: Messrs. Alien, Ball,
CdLle1a, COckeraV, HUGHES, of High
land, CASTOR, Kemp, PdrT, Robinson,
iStdtC, TfckHey, and wilson, of Wayne
Yes, even the gentlemen from High
land himself is found recorded voting
FOR a bill containing the very same
principles of which he complains
Certainly only differing in this, that
in the one of which he complains the
most the transfer was made Temporal
rily, while in the one he is found vot-
ing for, it is absolute. But one thing
more as to Democratic record upon
this subject. On the passage of the
appropriation bill of 1867, containing
the transfer of the S50,009 26 before
spoken of, on a motion to insert ''tem-
pOrarily" before transferred" five
Democrats voted no, and afterward
three of the five voted for the bill.
This arrangement of names, how
ever, is only to show the truth of the
statement that the disposition of these
funds was not partisan question, but
was simply question of general or
local application. AS before stated,
the fund was by all parties regarded
as one not Peeded for the purpose for
which raised, and not being drawn
upon for that purpose, and therefore
disposed of as before described. And
yet in every one of these acts trans
ferring and appropriating these funds,
the object had in raising them was
kept prominently in view. and while
provision was made for reimbursing
the fund to the amount taken for State
purposes, local authorities were re-
quired carefully to estimate and so
report any amount needed for relief
purposes before transferring and ap-
plying TO other purposes, and in case
relief should at any time be needed
they were required to levy and raise
the amount needed. Has the amount
transferred TO the sinking fund and
use for payment of the debt of the
State been since needed for the pur-
pose for which originally raised? Is
it now thus needed? If not then
needed, and it is necessary now to
reimburse, there has been saved to
the State by its transfer nearly $780,
600 in interest. But is it needed? or
has it been, since transferred?
1t was not thus needed at the ses-
sion of 1867, for no call came for its
reimbursement, but instead thereof
came the passage of the transfer act of
that year, the bill for which was in
trOduced by a Democrat-the distin-
guished gentleman from Coshocton
(Mr. Thornhill, of the last House,
and for which every Democrat present
in each House voted. At the session
of 1868 it was not needed; had it been,
the Legislature, then being in the
hands of the peculiar friends of the
soldier, would most certainly have
provided for its restoration. Instead
Of tbiS we find at that session apntb