The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1879-03-06
LIE TEssLER BOND BILL.

THE following article is from the Canal
Fulton Signal Of last week and is fair,
candid and truthful statement on the
part of Mr. Yockey. As to the Fessler
property held in trust for the bondsmen,
of which the Signal speaks, it is sufi-
cient to sayit is heavily mortgaged, and
in the present status Of property in Cam
ton, will not benefit much the county
or bondsmen. This property will not
stand in the way Of settlement, But
read the article;
THE bill introduced by Representa-
tive Woriey, to empower the County
Commissioners to settle with Fessler's
hondsmen, which has already passed
the House, and will, in all probability,
pass the Senate, is the principal topic for
argument by the tax payers in this por-
ton of the county-some fayoring the
bill, while others are bitterly opposed to
it. When we first learned of the bill,
we concluded it was the game Of cer-
tain clique to defraud the county out Of
that which was due her, and we were
ready to oppose it with all our might,
but after investigating the matter, and
learning from some of the best men of
the county, who know, the true condition
Of affairs. we at once were willing to ad-
NIT that compromise, such as the bill
granted, would be to the best interest of
all concerned. And right here we wish
to say, for those who entertain the idea
that we are getting well paid for advoca-
ting the passage Of such bill, that we
have not received dollar, or the proms
ise of any, should the bill pass. We,
advocate the bill because we believe it
10 be right, and the best thing the Com
missioners can do for the Taxpayers OF
the county: OF the nineteen original
bondsmen, several have made assign
ments, some are insolvent, and only a
few are heavy taxpayers, and should
the Commissioners litigate, what they
would collect would be collected from
five or six of the whole nineteen.
It is stated that these defalcations did
not occur during Fessler's second term.
(which they say they can prove bur that
some of them occurred during his first
term, and if this be true it will be hard
to establish liability of bondsmen. But
we are told that few Of the bondsmen
admit that every dollar of the deficit
can be collected. From what we can
learn not single dollar can be collected
from those who so report the case, 1t is
easy to talk when you have nothing to
lose The mere passage Of this bill does
not compel the Commissioners to COM
promise at 80 per cent, or any per cent.
unless they choose to do so.
This argument is used of late by those
who oppose the bill That should the
Commissioners compromise with the
bondsmen at 80 cents on the dollar, the
bondsmen would then sell Fesslers
property, upon which they hold mort
gage. reimburse themselves with the pro-
ceeds, and hence get out of the trouble
without it costing them dollar. We are
opposed to any move of this kind. The
property of Fessler should be turned
over to the Commissioners, and then,
after a thorough investigation by the
Commissioners, it appeared that 80 or 40
per cent. additional was all that could
be realized from the bondsmen, we say
compromise, rather than enter into
long and expensive law suit, which
would cost the county heavily, and in
the end probably realize less than by a
compromise.