Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1873-04-03


ditor's Oaice agreed with bonds as reg
isterei; our examination OF the bonds |
was not very thorough; 4 part Of the /
bonds mad been cancelled; there were
some that lad not been cancelled; find
ing that number OF them were can
celIed; we cancelled quite number of
them; d9n't know ihat-we. cancelled |
all. - - - '.--
Z, Did yaa -eompare The redeemed |
bonus OF the Barnesville & Somerton |
Road with the credits given the'rFeas-
u4er:
a. Yes, we compared them, and
found that the bonds on hands did not
equal the credits given the Treasurer
by about $1,000 ''' =, 1 " .
q. Did you ever compare the regis
tered bonds Of the raad with the En-
gineer's certificates
. A. did on all tie roads that 1 was
CONNECTED with in the Hinter of 1870;
found the Register and certificates to
-'5AS = " 414i wv vi EtifcSSAEtJtIOllS, III
which bonds had been improperly
charged tothe wrong road; the improp-
er charges were corrected at that time,
and made right on the Register. ''.' ls
Q. What was the manner of your
comparison Of t!,ebonds with the cred
its given the Treasurer?
i. The bonds were assorted out into
the different settlements with the
Treasurer as near as could be from the
terms OF their falling due aud by count
| ing the interests upon the bonds out
Istapding up to tlle, Date Of cath settle
inent, l found that the bonds and in
terest probdoly paidsof at each settle
nrent agreed :. very closely win tho
Freasurer's credits, until the SHptem-
Der settlement Of 1870, when the Treas
urer received a credit Of, paving of
bonds and coupons 70 the ambuht of
t$7 900, or Il little more. I found no
bonds falling due Is that time on that
road, Chat il, the $omerton R2ad)
I q. by P..;terson)- are you aware
that about that tlne'the Treasurer re-
tceiyed a double credit?
\. Yes. -...i i.'....'-..
| q. Did you take that into considcra-
tion? ? i-.t, ,...-,, ..-
as 1eS. .Is ,-..-J n.a ssaa.
| Q. (by Kennon) Did you make aH
Examination of the Bond Register to
ascertain when the next bonds after
the Sept, 20, settlement fell due. '
A. / hat was done at the time; found
they came due in the following NoyeEn-
ber. ''il 80 ''1 ~. -
Q. D.;t you 'sinll that the trre.aas;iii,rs;ar ii,s;
WAS credited with fhe same amount on
that road ab0at thai time. ...-...5..
4. Yes - --.-.- ~
i q. DID you find that the Treasurer
was charged with the same amount at
that Aine to .,baiance thesextra credit
given him. rss -Ii i.,fti r.... .--- .
i. did. ...-,. sos-,,.-s III .-. a-s- 3D. -1.s
Z. Taking the double credit to the
I Treasurer and the single charge to
j him Of the same amount, would it
d nave changed the result of your exam
iuatiOn? --'-
Il Lt.-ThyexsFa credit had no effect up-
Ton the eXamipation. .,AE ...-. ~
; l. q. Was the Bond Register intended
to contain, and did il coutain all the
bonds that was issued? - ~
7 4. twas, and contained All; it con-
Ptained all the legally l53Jied bOnds-ail
til.sb Wera ieeEeced,iDy the Engineers
certificate, ............. .........i.s .s,t, .s
Q. Should not the Bonds that We're
. redeeneb the Treasurer, and mark.
ed '!re4eened'' upon the Register and
} the b6nds, Still outstanding upon The
3 Register compare with the whole
amount of bonds issued?, ..-...
y. They should agree.
I Q.jrhere is an apparent deficiency In
1.-THE aggregate upon all the Pixies n TAI:
county Of Il little over $4,000. Can
] yoUgive rs any information as to how
it occurred. Have you any theory thai
! laccouut for it.
Z AZ Can give" no information as tC
!. howJit occurred i first supposed i,
might'have originated by bonds hav.
ing been redeemed and not marked re
deemed on the register, Which upon an
exalniliation Of bonds and register in
November, found it could not have
been. second L supposed it might
hava bean oecasiQned. by charging I'M
pr0pegiy the Roads with Bonds belong
= lfhg 70 The Bdildihg find. Our exam
! inaE9ai demonstrated pretty concIu.
sively that, this could NOT be the case.
DID XOa not make a ,Nery.iibeTal
allowance for interest in omparin2
J theS3 Tiriots credits and bonds you
? have! Spoken iOf:HEi' I'D 'fhi ~i'i'l'i. e.
I los A. Jdid; ,t.e,uaject being merely to
lllQcatelthe date ofshe apparenkdi1crep-
: 8. You have said there was va no bond.
: due -6h the'a0iisrtYn' Hjaa ih- Septein-
) Der r,9lS70; Z; noat'nohY mlieirluterest was
! FJuer4ttnaai.4a I'm sno IlR ,..ispi,a,
D O! Ef5V If1lgJhT IlgJh it B5hit5, F. ii Nov8nbsr +3ib 4.
IL, 1922. ah2t on ljai.t.tilar /" 1870, were
dueDh 'ihecSpnl, ,sniGg ft3jul2'v74 - aei
.A.ii3g eKaminins the Rdgtster ! Htls!
a,25o due q,lM6qT lM6qT- + Jand @AOQi daa iiae, IL
Il '@,o,ss @ aa1hl7 rfi,sse bond9P aiil tell It's
when ti1ags. wtse dhn, W.nin they were
!, pail /, Withfrpieaincc, :lse this August
craQt, 1915, ssiYa1. til2. fsel5pF Fes, itsilt 4
i question refers to the bonds f1entioned
!, in th;nlast question and answer. so r
Il A.aFf0.n.tac Ilreasuler's c<tnceiiing
stamp ttAaY aasf appear to have been
paid in 1871. theE were due in nov.
Land Dec. :1S7D, thA AMOUNT b1iI or
Them was s4,G5O.i 81 7'ili.'5i n.
-q, -.:--.i ..--.sz-.-ei IAiiA--a iijri.
HOUSE .--A1rGa 26.-Billsf were in
i ttroduced amending the law rotating to
lsheriiilsi, feesja lrequiring township
trustees TO build approachesto bridges;
authorizing the, trustees Of. the .Agri-
; cultural Gol!ageI 10 seAi.the Virginia
: Military. leads N tais s5tatei in tracts