Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1876-09-13
Gov. Hayes Answers.

COLUMBUS, o, Sept 5 A sensa.
tioual story was telegraphed from Ere
mont last Saturday, stating that it had
been discovered that Governor Hayes
had falslfed his return of personal
property made to the Assessor of San
dus >y county. Thinking there might
be two sides to the story, your CORES
pondent called on Governor Hayes to-
night, and directed his attention to the
matter The Governor said the tale
was a tissue of mlsre presentations. but
he did not submit to formal interviews,
as he had already C mmun Gated all the
facts in the case to Gen. Comfy, of the
State Journal, who would furnish
rroof-slips Of the article lie had pre-
pared for him on the question. From
these slips | condeDse the following:
:. he charge is that Sardis Birchard,
Hayes uncle and benefactor, listed
S9:982 personality in 1873, exclusive
of money and credits aud that Hayes,
with the same personality in posses
sion, listed only 1000 IN 1874. This
is not true. Blrchard return includ-
ed ali notes, credits, and book accounts.
Hayes IN 1874 made no return of
notes, credits and book accounts, be-
/ cause all the credits were swallowed in
debts The same is true of the notes.
The personality bequeathed to Hayes
was almost entirely bank stocks, on
which The tax is paid by the bank.
I The one item Of all he personality re
turned by Birchard, SO 9o2, was more
than swallowed up by the obligations
incurred by Hayes in carrying out
Orchards projects for the benefit of
thesown of Fremont This very ques
ton was at the time investigated by
Democratic Board Of Equalization, and
reported by them as all correct. 1t
will be seen that the debts more than
offset the credits under this item, and
that the return Of $1,000 in 1874 was
for household goods, which were not
subject to this deduction. TIE in
crease in this item to S. 600 in 1875
was due to an increase in Hayes pri-
vate library. -
As to the second charge, Hayes says
he never had and never returned
watch worth $500. The three watches
returnedlare keepsakes, and altogether
not worth $3.50. One watch Mrs
lIayes had when a school girl. 1t has
not been running for. twenty years
Thirdly, Hayes did not own a piano
at the time the return was made, and
\ only rented one last October for the
use of a niece who was visiting him.
This summer he traded a lot for one.
Fourthly, it is alleged that Hayes
returned in 1875 and 1876 three
horses at $500, when they we're worth
$500. In answer, Hayes says one of
those horses is twenty-seyen years old,
and not worth anything, yet he is list
ed at $50, and that the street valuation
of the other two is $50 and $lO0, yet
he listed them for taxation at $3.50.
His best horse cost him $125.
Filthy, it is charged that in 1875
Hayes returned four carriages at $3.50,
when it is known he paid $500 for one
and $3.50 for another. In answe.,
Hayes says the carriage referred to W. s
not bought till year sfter the alleged
false return was made, and then it was
properly listed, as the returns Of 1876
show. Two of these carriages were,
in fact, buggy and wagon, one of
which was soon after sold for 500, and
one would not sell at any price; but
they were listed for S75. The other
was secondhand phaeton, which cost
$100. @9 a
Sixthly, it was charged that s33.7o0
was left in Hayes. hands in bequests
made by Birchard, which he was allow
ed to hold for5three years, and that he
did not return dollar of this money
for taxation. Hayes says not one dollar
was left him to pay bequests; that it
was intended the bequests should be
paid from sales Of lands, and he was
given three years SO that the land
could be sold for this purpose. This
real estate is, of course, taxed by the
county without consultation or consent
Of its owner or holder.
! Seventhly, this property was all vest.