Tama County Republican. (Toledo, Tama County, Iowa) 1867-1872, 1871-08-17
Re-Stating the Case.

Il, is altogether probably that MANY
OF those elected as delegates to the
County Convention have not seen
the last two issues OF the REpUBLI-
Can. In the hope ofyet bringing the
facts in the case of Tie People VS..
Theo. Schaeffer to the notice of ma
ny who have not yet seen the state
mcnt Of them, we again state the
ease in brief
Two weeks ago, the REPUBLICAN
alleged that Theo. schaetfer had
proved himself an unfa,hiul and in
efficient county officer. We made
-'ne allegation of untaithlessness On
tie strength OF facts, five of which
we detailed at length, and many
more of which VIC could have given,
showing that Mr.. Schaeffer showed
par,iality and .avoritlsm in the can
ceiling Of county warrants when there
was hot money to cancel all. The
facts we gave showed fully that some
men could get money on county
warrants when other men could not.
In one case, gentleman proved to
Mr.. Schaeffer, by the official books,
.1hat the treasury vaults contained at
;hat time $4,000, Of county funds, and
vet ar. Schaetfer refused to cancel
the gentleman's warrants. To this
particn!a. case, the reply of Mr..
Sehactfer was neither direct nor con-
elusive. Here it is
Con the first Of every manth the treas
arer strikes q balance and if il so happens
that there is 5000 county fund he has it on
hand to pay out, and in my past experience
as treasurer. | find tina, that amount could
he disburscd very easily Ia q few hours
sapra.;ng then that some in1uisitive bust.
ness mar ehould come into the Office on the
10th or 18th Of the month and should exams
Inc the books and he should fud the bal
anco on the first day of said month to be
$4,000. Does this prove that the treasurer
on the 10th or 18th Of the month has that
same balance on hand? Or has the treas
tirer the permission Of the business men Of
the vicinity, or county to deduct from said
balance the amount he has disbursed since
the frs. OF the month =
The hypothetical case which Mr..
Schacffcr makes out, does mt meet
the case we made. Mr.. Schaeffer did
not dare deny the facts we gave, and
he attempted to break their force by
this weak answer. TO this day, Mr..
Schaeffer has not denied the essen
tial facts as we originally set them
forth. They must therefore stand
confessed, and judgment mus: be
rendered against Mr. Schaeffer.
We instanced the case Of Mr. w.
F. Johnston who tried to get money
when he knew there were one
thousand dollars of county funds on
hand, but was refused, and who at.
forwards wrung from the County
Treasurer the confession that the
thousand dollars were still there and
that he hat promised Il sare it for GER
tan other parties. While also deny.
ing that he knew OF the transfer Of
Jail fund to county fund, Mr.. Schacf-
fer Indignantly spurned the idea that
he mado any such confession as we
sad he made, and in the denial he
used this expression: land the state
,ncnt Of the Treasurer making a
special promise of it 1.-THE money to
any one, s utterly and most emplat-
'cally false" The denial was broad
and deep, and no course was left for
his but to prove it. Accordingly we
introduced the written statements Of
w. f. Johnston and Nathan Fisher
two good witnesses, and both cert.
lying that they heard him acknowl.
edge that he was keeping money for
certain party, at the same time re.
fusing to cash their warrants. We
were willing TO let the matter rest
there, having proved our statement.
but Mr.. Schaeffcr returns this week
with another letter and in this letter
fn ncE NOW 1pI./aa tIat ha r.nc cn,.;.,e.
Ing that money for Mr.. Blodgetl, and
he does ne. deny that he so told Mr..
Johnston and Mr. Fisher. SO far. SO
good. We have proved the truth Of
what we asserted and we have got
Nlr. Sshaeffer to acknowledge oyer
his own signature that we told the
:ynlh an That he did not. Mr..