Smyrna times., 1877-03-14

THE ALMsHoUsE SoUABBLE.-The Presi-
dent of the Levy Court, Mr.. Register, takes
exception to an item we published recently
about the Almshouse. We print his letter
on the first page of the present issue. He
defends the action of the Levy Court and
comes at the subject with spirit of fair
mes, or seems to.
In the first place he objects to the state
ment that Mr.. Sarde, of Camden, was ousted
from the Trusteeship. We so understood
it and the Sentinel so stated it. From the
best information we can get Mr.. Sarde had
been in the Trusteeship but two years, and
according to law and custom he was enti-
tied to another year. Others Of the Board
have beeni in for many years, we believe, and
the inference is that he too would have
been continued if he had not objected to
the payment of bill of $3.50 for tobacco
which the Overseer, Mr.. Layton, had pur-
chased for his own private comfort.
Here is what sounds strange in Mr..
Registers letter. He says: We have not
word to say against Mr.. Sarde. If the
charge is true as to the bill objected to by
him, he was in the right, and we commend
him for it." Then, if it be so commendable,
was he not the man to keep in the Board,
instead of the one to GO out? Then why
insult him by displacement? And why say
"1 the charges" &c. 1t was a very easy
matter for the Levy Court to know all about
it, without any "if's," and we presume it
did know, and then to turn Mr.. Sarde
down, when "he was in the right" was an
intended insult to him and a compromise
with the irregularity of the institution. II
was particularly glaring insult when we
reflect that other Trustees, who voted tC
allow that unjust tobacco bill, were the
ones to be reelected. No matter if Mr.
= Sarde's period had expired, he was the very
man to be returned-he and Messrs. Whar
ton and Truax, who voted with him.
The truth of the matter, after consulting
with those who are in position to know
all about it, we believe to be this Msssrs
Sarde, Truax and Wharton have insiste,
upon change in ~. matter Of settling tn
bills of the ii-'. "h.ie the other fiv
members, known as the "old Board" or
posed any change. The Overseer has bee
presenting his bills to the Trustees at eac
monthly meeting, already footed up, an
they have been passed upon Sin the lump
by the Board. Mr.. Sarde, who was Secrt
tary, insisted that they should be read an
each acted upon separately, and properl
scrutinized. The matter was voted upo
and five out of the eight Trustees preser
voted no. Messrs. Truax and Wharto
voted with Mr.. Sarde. Mr.. s. then pr
ceeded to examine the bills in his individu
capacity, and unearthed this tobacco bill
This raised the ire of the 0verseer and I'll
Physician, DR.. Cooper, (who keeps the Owe
seer's accounts,) and they made up the
minds 10 unssat him. They and the
friends laid the matter before the lie,
Court, and the Court sustained them.
this action of the Court does not carry Il
inference that the county ought to pay |;
the Ovsrseer's questionable luxuries, VIII
inference does it convey?
We have not proposed to take mus
stock IN this controversy; it's the Se,atine
fight, not ours. But we have no reason
question the charges that are public
made. 1t seems that the Overseer forg
he was the creature of the Trustees, al
went about this affair as if they were
creatures. And now, If other bills, th
have a more liquid aspect than this tobac
bill, are held up to light it will be bis os
fault