The Findlay Jeffersonian. [volume] (Findlay, Hancock County, Ohio) 1870-1881, 1876-09-15
TX. w He Returned $780, 90 Worth of
Property at &c.. O6-A Beautiful
Recer rd for an Aspiring Politician
Special Despatch TO the Enquirer.

TOLEDO, September 2.-The Nor
thern Ohio Democrat of to morrow
morning will contain full exhibit of
the false and fraudulent tax returns Of
personal property for the past three
years made by Rutherford B. Hayes
| to the tax as SCISSOR of the First ward
of the town of Fremont. The person
al property, other than non-taxable,
valuable under the will Of SorGis
Birchard at S32, 900, Cf which Z B.
| Hayes Is devisee. is returned for taxa
ton under the oath of K. B. Hayes at
| So, 500. Three watches, the aggregate
value of which is $500, are sworn TO be
worth $3.50 in 1875, while in 1874 one
of the watches is sworn TO be worth
$500. Four carriages are returned as
being worth $3.50 in 1874, while the
maker of one of the carriages states
that Mr.. Hayes paid him in that year
$500 for a single carriage. One horse
valued a $500, is returned As worth
but 500. In possession of piano, he
has failed to make return thereof, as
the law of Ohio requires. With over
800, 600 worth of personal property,
Governor Hayes has returned, under
oath, for the past three years, less than
Sc, 600 worth for taxation,
The Enquirer's article contains the
gist of the charges of fraud and perjury
against Gov. Hayes made in the Toledo
paper.
knowing as / do that there is not
the least foundation in truth for a
single one of these charges. think it
proper that | should refute them
through the columns of your paper.
Not to leave rom for a possible doubt
in the mind of any candid person in
addition to my own statement / give
the swora statements of several citizens
of this place, of the very highest re-
spectability, whose statements cover
the whole ground, and completely
refute every charge of fraud and
wrong on the part of Gov. Hayes.
They not only disprove any fraud, but
they prove that Gov. Hayes not only
listed ali his personal property sub
jected TO taxation, but at a valuation
greater than they were, in fact, worth
Upon inquiry at the Auditors office
l learned that some person connected
with the Toledo paper was permitted
to take Gov Hayes original returns
from the file and carry them away TO
Toledo, for what purpose is best
known to the getters up of these false
charges, for they are supposed to be
correctly Transcribed on the Books of
the Auditor.
The Toledo paper makes the follow
ing statement.
Birchard returned in personal prop
erty, exclusive of moneys, credits,
notes, book accounts, etc. 50, 9S2, TO
the Assessor in April, 1873, and Gov
ernor HAYES, after having all that
Birchard returned added to what lie
owned previously, returned to the
Assessor for taxation in April, 1874,
all his personal property, not included
in the seventeen enumerated items,
one thousand dollars. Was this
perjury
This statement is grossly false. Mr..
Birehard no such return in 1873 or at
any other time. rhe Auditors Books
show that in April 1878 Mr. Birchard
returned 50, 600 in money and S9S2 in
other personal property, but no credits.
Th re is undoubtedly o mistake in
transcribing onto the Auditors Books.
In April 1872 lac returned SO. 500 in
credits but no money and Mr.. Miller
says, III his AFFIDAVIT, that he knows
Mr.. Birchard had no such amount o.
money at that tine. But the Toledo
paper says that Mr. Birchard returned
s., 9S2 in 2S63, exclusive of moneys,
credits, notes, book accounts, etc., u
which are entirely false,