Fayette County herald. [volume] (Washington [Washington Court House], Fayette County, O. [Ohio]) 1860-1???, 1872-10-03

ers had made the count, and believing
it to be county money, it was carried
back and resdeposited in the bank,
MIR Peter Murphy, a director, testi-
fed that ''My understanding is that
loans have, been made to Lindley for
examination purposes. l have been
told they were from our bank. think
the amount was fifty thousand dollars
at one time"
Micajah Hughes, President. testified
that the bank dad frequently furnished
money to be deposited in Treasury
vaults for the inspection of the Com
missieners when they made their reg
ular examinations.
Mr. Philip Hughes, another direct
or, testified as did Mr. Murphy
Lindley, Treasurer, testified that at
one time the Cashier threw a package
of aoney in at the Treasury window
and a few moments after entered the
Treasury with the Commissioners, and
counted the money, found the amount
of cash in the Treasury to correspond
with the Auditors books and when
the Board arose, the money amount
ing to $4,000 was Immediately car
ried to the bank again
Commissioner Miller testified that
he had heard that at two previous reg
ular examinations of the County Treas
ury $4,000 dollars was borrowed at
one time, and S65,O00 at another, from
the First National Bank.
OF the six officers of the bank, to
wit: M. Hughes, President, Jas. Beat
ty, Vice President Cornell, Cashier ;
Murphy, Phil. Hughes and Sohn, di
rectors, all testified to the loans made
by the bank to the Treasury, except
Beatty, who lived in the country, and
could not be reached by subpoena, and
Sohn, who was not called upon to tes
tify.
Here, then, from sworn testimony,
we have the evidence that the bank had
not only received deposits from the
Treasury for the past six years OF
Brant's two terms and Lindley's term,
but we have evidence that at least
during the year 1869 the bank furn-
ished the money that enabled the
Treasurer, to make a proper showing
of his cash. .....
During all of these six years, Mr..
Sohn was director of the bank, anC
VET in their eighth paragraph the joint
committee, in their defense of Mr.
Sohn, say that Sohn had no knowledge
of the practices of the bank until
1870.
Every business man in Hamilton
knew of the relationship existing be
tween the bank and County Treasury
Of all the bank directors Mr.. Sohr
was the only one who resided in Ham
ilton, and who, in consequence would
be most frequently consulted by the
cashier on matters of business. MIR
Suhn was, ,and is,daily in attendance a
the bank. Is there any man stupic
enough TO believe that during all thest
six years, with large interest involved
with access to the books of the bank
in ear range of the daily gossip of TIL
frequenters of the bank, Mr.. Sohl
could possibly be ignorant of trans
actions known and canvassed by ever,
otuer member of the directors board
Ii it be insisted, however, that Mr.
Sohn, was, as the committee say b
was, ignorant of these matters whe
he had every facility to become famll
lar with them where are his qualifica
tions to sit in Congress, as reform
member, to detect violations Of law
and to bring criminals to justice?
If, however, Mr.. Sohn was aWare-c C
| the transactions between his bank aR
the Treasurer, yet winked at them bt
cause banking on the county fund
swe1led his dividends, what guarante
have we that, if elected to Congres'
he will refuse to expose frauds so lon
as it is profitable for him to conce;
them?
But again 1t is asserted by the join
committee, in their defense of NJ
Shon (see 9th paragraph) that it
not pretended by. any one that NJ
Sohn, as an individual, ever receive
or handled any of the county money
If he did not handle this money {
an "individual, he certainly did as
director, and profitably, too.
The settlement books in the office
the Auditor show that Brant eollecte
during the four years Of his office tt
sum of 81, ,422, ,262 90; Lindley co
lected S7O2,742 IS; Total COLLECTIONS
$2,125, ,0O5 O8.
How much of Brant's collection
were deposited in bank we cannot sa
Ell lot swears he had as much as 5000
900 on deposit, and when Brant turnt
his office over to Lindley he had d.
post of $S3 900. But we can appro.
innate Suppose the bank allowo
Brant four per cent. on his deposit
To make $4,000 interest in for
years Mr. Brant must have kept {
,, continual deposit $4,000 during b
, two terms This $4,000 the bar
would use at per month, say aft
deducting the per cent it paid Brar
= IA per cent At simple interest th
! would realize the bank S10,500 p
/, year, or $4,000 for the four years
, had the money from Brant
In addition to this it had the use
Lindley's funds for one year, say $5(
> 900, on which at the same rate of i
terest, II per cent. it realized 5000
= or altogether, Brant and Lindley s
$4,000
Now the capital stock of the ba
is 100000: Mr. John w Sohn h
$4,000 of that stock. 1t becom
then a simple question of proporti
. what profit Mr.. Sohn has made out
i converting the County Treasury in
an appendage to the First Nation
. Bank. Mr.. Sohn's share would
the IT of the $4,000 and wol
amount to about S7,140.
But again: The joint commits
L aver in the 4th paragraph of their I
tense of Mr.. Sohn, THAT it was
,r certained in March, 1870, that Lind
h, was defaulter but before that ii