The Findlay Jeffersonian. [volume] (Findlay, Hancock County, Ohio) 1870-1881, 1875-09-17

O~@SOC ~ A@AADA Va OaNoos
For Infirmary Director,
JOSEPH WILSON, of Liberty.
For Surveyor,
GEO. w. POWELL, of Findlay.
HENRY BROWN ON TIE DEFENSIVE
HENRY BROWN, ex-Prosecuting At
torney, and candidate of the Democracy
for the same Office, ''comes to the front,
in an article in this weeks Courier. His
first cause of grievance is that we re-
portedSS16. 81 in notes against him found
in the safe after Wall absconded, which
he alleges were cancelled and delivered
up to him September 5th, 1872, and
locked up in his safe, and Mr.. BROWN
says that ''Mr. ELI G. DeWoLFE knows
thisas well as any other man, for 1 have
invited him to my Office and shown him
these notes since the publication Of his
sLdnderosGs and false editorial concern
ing them"
Now, Mr.. BROWN conversed with E.
q. DEWoLFE in regard to his intention
to publish that editorial before it ap-
peared, but never once offered to show
him the notes, nor did be OEWoLFE)
get sight of those notes until Wednes.
day morning, September 18th. Now,
while the possession of the notes is primG
Jdcie evidence that they have been paid,
the law of April IL, 1858, says:
All payments of money into the Coun-
ty Treasury of every description, except
ing the payment of taxes charged on the
duplicate, and made before the return
by the Treasurer of the delinquent list
for unpaid taxes, shall be paid to tie
county Treasurer, on the draft of the
County Auditor in favor of the Treas
nrer; and the county Auditor shall pre-
serve duplicate copy of every such
draft, and the Auditor and Treasurer
shall each keep an accurate record of
the number, date and amount of every
such draft, specifying the respective
funds in favor of Which they are drawn.
Now, Mr.. BROWN invites any ''inan
or woman, Democrat or Republican, to
call at his Office and inspect these can
celed notes. When they have done
that, let them go to the Auditors office
and see if the Auditor or Treasurer's
records show the payment of such money
into the County Treasury. If Mr..
BROWN has. paid the money into the
Treasury he can show it; and why does
he not do it9 Let him produce a copy
of that record.
As to the second cause of grievance |
that We alleged that on q settlement |
made Sept. 16, 1865. eight months after
Mr. Brown went out of the Prosecutors 1
Office, he was found indebted to Han
cock county in the sum of 1902 03. And |
he produces an extract frcm the Journal /
OF the Commissioners TO show that she /
has settled IN full TO our satisfaction as
such Prosecutor, and says the Auditor
will take pleasure in showing the Journ-
al Record of this settlement. Now, if
Mr. Brown paid that $500 % into the
County Treasury, it ought to appear on
the books of the Auditor and Treasurer.
Will Auditors SHAFER. HILL, or MosHER
show that part of the transaction. Per
haps, if Mr.. Brown rummages over that
safe OF his once more, he may find a
voucher for the payment of this 1902 O3.
But the same section of law quoted |
above is equally applicable in this case.
Ii it has been paid the record will show
tit is easy of access, and ought to be
produced. 1t is a record made by Mr.. /
Browns own party, and he ought to be
willing to have it produced.
AT last, Mr.. Brown. in his defense.
comes to the 81 ,094 note, which he ad- |
mits is unpaid, and which he says Twas |
given on final settlement with me on |
Mr.. Wallis defalcation." He says that |
it is drawing eight per cent. and is
abundartly secured. But why should |
slIe county do all this for Mr.. BROWNE |
Why should it be carried along at eight |
per cent. and the county pay twelve for
money! And then he goes off into |
whine about poverty and prosecution
that would be discreditabIe to an over |
grown schoOl-boy. Stand up, Henry;
no one wishes to harm you. You have
held Office at the hands of the people of
this county for many years. You are
again before the people for their suf- |
frages. Your public record is public |
property, and you should not finch and |
whine when it is criticised.
Finally, we wish TO say that in expos
ing this matter, we have been actuated
by no personal or unkind feeling toward
any one, and nothing but tasense of duty
as public journalist has induced us to
bring these matters before the tax pay
ers. We pass by for the present the mean
insinuations and personal innuendoes in
Mr. Browns defense. They are without
foundation. and were they true, are not
pertinent to the discussion. We arc not
before the people for an Office. 1t is
Mr. Browns record that is on trial, and
we shall not be diverted from the task
of showing it up. The people of this
county, aetuated 10y PartS spirit, and
snislead and deceived by the wordy
promises of pettifogging politicians. may
elevate men to Office who abuse the
trusts eOnaded to them, but when such
abuse comes to our knowledge, or be-
comes a matter Of public record, they
shall never have it to say that we so far
forgot our duty as public journalists as
TO stand quietly by and raise no warning
voice against such suicidal course. The
shall not be ours. Henry
Broom ought not 10 be elected PrOsecut-
ing Attorney. |