The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1879-02-13
THE FnssLER DEFICIT.
viii the Civil Suit ExpOse OrlmlnAliiJ i-Wll
Settling the Civil Suit Prevent the Prosecution
or Guilty PARTIES

VIII the Civil Suit Expose CrlmlnAliv t-Wlh
Settling the Civil Suit Prevent the Prosecution
OF Guilty PARTIES
By personal interview and by letters
friends have propounded inquiries re-
garding the proposed settlement with
Fessler's bondsmen. 0ne point usually
raised ia. The suit will expose other
guilty parties than Fessler.
In this civil suit to recover the deficit
from the bondsmen, it is not likely any
exposure of criminal character will be
attempted. This is the decided opinion
of lawyers on both sides, and of both
political parties. In the civil suit, as we
understand it, the requirements will be
to prove the bondsmen, and to establish
the amount of the deficit. II would not
relieve the bondsmen to prove that the
deficit was partly caused and brought
about by others than George Fessler,
The mode for criminal prosecution is
through indictment by the Grand Jury
or by arrest on charges duly brought be-
fore some other proper tribunal NO
good citizen desires to screen any person
who may be guilty. 1t should be re-
membered that when Mr., Fessler was
before the Grand Jury, he would say
nothing,
The civil suit, then, will not likely re-
alize the expectations of criminal deVel-
opments, and neither will a settlement
with the bondsmen prevent prosecution
now or hereafter.
We are aware that the opposition to
settlement with the bOndsmen is mainly
based on the expectation of important
developments during the progress of the
suit. Were it not for this, there would
be little or no opposition over the county
to the passage of Mr.. Worley's bill, to
empower the County Commissioners to
settle with the bondsmen at not less
than thirty per CENT A correct under
standing of the law, and the situation,
will soon convince any one of the fulfil
ity of opposing the settlement on such
grounds.
1t should be remembered, too, that the
passage of Mr.. Worley's bill leaves the
settlement and the terms Of settlement
wholly at the discretion of the Commits
soners. They are not men likely to act
without careful investigation and delib'
Grafton in matter of such importance.
The best interests of the county would
be subserved, and a fair settlement with
the bondsmen would realize more money
for the county than could possibly be se'
cured by a long and expensive suit.
This question is not political, and no
fair minded citizen will so consider it.
As we have said, the bondsmen are both
Republicans and Democrats, and the
whole matter is of a business character.
No one doubts that the county will make
more by prompt settlement than by. liti-
cation. True, litigation may harrass and
ruin the bondsmen, at least some of
them, and impoverish some families now
advanced in years; may hang a heavy
Judgment over them all, and SO prevent
future business effort-all this without
special benefit to the county or to any
one. Now, we ask in all candor-is this
desirableP Would it show commend
able spirit? Can any good citizen justi'
fy and recommend such prosecuting
unfeeling course? We trow not.
The experience of other counties over
the State would urge settlement, as al
together best for the taxpayer. Consid-
cred from business standpoint, then,
this is the best course to pursue for all
concerned. We hope no one is small
enough to be actuated in matter Of this
kind by partisan considerations. Mar
row indeed is that mind that would sur
render and sacrifice all generous senti-
ments toward unfortunate humanity
upon the altar of party politics. Give
us the man with heart more disposed
to magnanimity than malice.