Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1871-09-01
Reply to the Answer of Mess. Roach,
Thornton and Hunt.

their opinion, accepted by them, and thus end
the unfortunate controversy.
In the Journal Of July 80, they reply TO our
proposition, and spurn the offer, and charge us
with demanding impossibihties, when we ask
that all the parties Interested, unite in consent
ing To the arbitration. The writer Of that ar
ticle knew perfectly well when he penned II,
that nothing less than the consent of all the par
ties Interested would make it biudiugj and our
ohoot, as said before, was to secure inality
of the difficulty not to engage in newspa-
per warfare.
The holders Of the bonds are well known,
and this is a very superficial pretext to avoid
acceding to an honorable proposition to have this
unfortunate difficulty arbitrated, by men in
whom we jointly express confidence, by uniting
in their selection instead of allowing the suits
ia the Supreme Court to tardily await their un-
certain time OF hearing.
We noe understand these men to say that
they want an investigation of their proceedings ,
simply, while in office, and let the Bond and
other matters take care Of themselves. That
| is, they want to have selected a special com
| mttee, of "g0od true men-men Of integrity,
| well known in the community disnterested -
| outside Of the town." Nc, into whose hands
| shall be placed 1.-THE records aud dH The facts"
connected with their official life, gether with
| the published report OF the committee appoint
! ed in June 1870, by the qualified electoPs nt the
| district at their annual meeting ahd then have
! this select committee report on the truthtuness
| or un,ruthfulness Of what they are pleased tn
call our 'RascaHy Pamphlet" This is indeed
a very singular request for them to make, when
1t is known that the records are, and always
| have been, open to them and all others, tn eX-
anime and point out specifically, the errors and
"falsehoods " they claim the report contains.
We doubt very much, the possibility OF find
ing a committee Of gentlemen such as you
name, to serve and such a committee would be
! perfectly satisfactory to ns when they are made
10 understand that all that is desired Of them, is
IN settle case Of veracity between the com
! mittee, and the mon whose names are at the
head of this communication.
The committee Of June 1870 referred to, made
their report bv request; and state therein wha
they say are facts and offer the records made
| BY the old board to prove their deeiarations.
i Three members of the old board say; sal
| their said statements are false aud lies Of thI
backest stamp" They charge the comWite'
with miSquoung the record" &c, Tile saic
eimmiitee challeuge the old board to specify
the false statements, Interpretations, &c, claimed
to be made by them, aud offer to as publicly
acknowledge any errors when established a
they have been promulgated.
This being the cndti4n of the affairs in con
truversy, the board are perfectly willing +
have them examined by said special committee
as proposed by You.
We will place in the hands Of said committe
when selected, the Records and all the paper
and books delit tered to us by you. and will eS
pect YOU to put into their hands the plans
specifications, contracts, and other impOrtan
papers MT delirered to us, and which are neces
sary to a full and clear understanding OF III
, whole matter in dispute.
We believe the quotations, extracts and hnan
cia statement as published by the commit
. tee, to be substantially correct. II would b
, strange indeed il there were not some errors j
II. We think it unfortunate in the said men
! a.. al ,.IIa hair ;
descend to such foods of Blingsgate, persona
> vi operation, coarse abuse, aud threats whe
facts and arguments would have been so niue
more appropriate and eifectual.
We propose tn allow yol the exclusive use {
, this stock in trade.
II is fresh news to us to learn from your al
ticle that every dollar of the face of the bond
) issued by the old board will certainly have
e be paid" also that 500 is the whnie dillerenc
between the old board and the people this b,
ing the excess interest over 6 per cent. W
were not much surprised at this 800 declara
= tinn after you had issued orders for S2 81
,, for the extra interest over s per cent. and rC
noried the sans officially, which when adfe
to the difference between8 per cent and pc
cent, in the face OF the bonds. would make th
| extra interest over $4,000 instead of 500.
But were surprised at your legal knowlele
in informing positively '' So that nObod
} can misuu ierstand it," that all the bonds au
interest thereon must be paid, even if the di,
trict gain the suit
E The fact is " nobody p" can uutiv.-t~-.a ha
: the bonds could be collected from the disri'
' if they gain the suit as stated by YOU.
t But we have desire to indulge in Levitt.
: The whole matter is a serious one affecting II
{ school the welfare Of the town, the peace az
harmony of the district and every sensible ma
will say settle it as soon as possible. and do eqn
ty and Justice TO all parties, by paying even
r. liar o! all just debts whether strictly legal {
not. -, -, w
rarar a. board, claimed that the district hi
naid All the cost of the improvement OF u
] school house. i,ut we do claim, and verilg b
leive, that if bs an" possibility or chance, y
court should declare the bonds valid and maj
, the district liable for Their payment, in Tia
: event the taxpayers will be wr9nged out
over $40 900. We further CLAIM that ihe NJ
and most important question 20 b. settieu al
fixed definitely, is what was the actt.a cost
{ the improevm .nt, and how much should the dl
e trict pay.
e This could be ascertained by a committee
= arbitrati n much better and much cheaper tina
q it can BE- settled in the courts The report
the cost Of said improvement by former boar
, though their Sec'y., J.. NJ. Hunt is not corrc
by several thousand dollars as their own boo
3 show conclusiYely.
In another column will be found a stateme
from Hon NJ. K. Waite which speaks for itse
It It correcls all the Singular misstatemens
the article Of the old board 81 far as he
, said to have made declarations in the con
n ro0m. We know this is the view be has .
20 WAYS taken of the case heretofore. We tul
: believe the Supreme Court will decide the
a bonds irregularly issued and invalid as bone
"A As an evidence of our sincerity and desi
- to have this vrxed question disposed OF,
hereby propose to unite with you and
bondhoIders in asking the Supreme Court
y take the case up out of is order and pass u
ID on it, provided you will consent to have the p'
"a ceedings so amended that all the different !
sues of boads and orders for extra interest, sh
be considered at same time, and final dispo
= tUn Of them made by the Supreme Court.
A. These men say we Z" dare not submit to
/; investigation" They will see from above II
s their offer is accepted in full, and we pred
that the "dare" will be on the other side.
in We =" dare" to go further The sail met
Il bers of old boarl say that all the statements
the "rascally" report "false" and lie
n and in their supplement Of June 10, they ma
at four seprate declarations, and "ehallenge tn
A successful denial"
! The first count relates to the item in the
port where the committee say that Sec'y HI
I'd issued during the year ending June 70, le
he orders to the amount Of S26, l67 81, and report
4. only S23,75 3S. Mr.. Hunt says he reported
orders drawn, and the "lying foul ul-m0uthed-sla
~ derers -" misrepresent his report. We wol
respectfully +" dare" to refer the truthlulness
ly this discrepancy to two ot Mr.. Hunts warm
"a personal friends, who are good accountants u
honorable men Hon. Asher Cook and Col.
n. K. Miller, aud will publish their report wi
n. made for the benefit Of former See'y.
do The answer to ID item is that the report d.
=, not say that Himmelman's note WAS paid lw
IL It says that Mr., Hunt reported 1t paid twicC
to first in 1867 and again in 1859 which is trne.
Items 3 aud 4th relate 10 that part Of the
port which claim balance due from A. ROa
- of Sl5l. They say Figures have been chang
er; and altered IN the Treasurers Box" In ansv
ST. we say that if the books Of MIR. Hunt and
a. Roach give correctly full list of all the ord
issued aad paid and they agree, and we beli'
hem to be correct, thea the district is most c
as tainly Sl5l short, in bis account, as reported
20. the committee. We say emphatically that
figures have been changed or altered To the
zee riment of Mr.. Roach. New footings are mi
ct but the old ones remain untouched.
n ? We are charitable enough to believe that
900 Roach Intended no wrong at the time, and ht
w estly settled for all the County Auditor iounC
] l.. ba i.,far Of 10 ~