The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1879-11-14
rHE LYoN CouNrY SUN.

thority of the Emporia NEWS, that the
evidence taken in New York and Bos-
ton, in the suit against certain parties in
Lyon, (he old board of county commIs-
sioners, we believe,) for cheating the
county out of about $4,000, had COM
pletely exonerated the persons sued.
Hon. j. d. Snoddy, the attorney for
those interested in bringing the suit, Gt|
was brought by the attorney general for
the county, has made a report to the
committee which engaged him. After
detailing the manner in which he had
performed his duty, he says:
"From all the testimony, when viewed
in light most favorable for the defend
ants, there appears to be loss to the
county of Lyon, in that stock and bond
transaction, by reason of peculatiOn, OF
five thousand five hundred dollars, and
in addition to this, the further loss of
one bond of one thousand dollars, and
such sum as was paid for interest upon
said appropriated bond, which would
make total loss to the county of up
ward of six thousand five hundred dol
lars.
From all the testimony taken, when
viewed in fair and impartial way, the
county has lost in the transaction, with
no reason for such loss, except fraud or
culpable negligence, at least ten thous-
and nine hundred and eighty-five dollars.
There are circumstances and facts which
raise very strong probability that the
actual loss 10 the county in this transac-
ton is very much more than the sum
last named. These losses arise from
1st-The defendants charging the
county for the bonds price greater than
that for which they were bought, and
could have been bought for, ct the date
of the purchase.
2d-The defendants charging the coun-
ty for interest upon said bonds for per-
Iod of time after they had been paid for
by the county with county funds.
3d-The appropriation of one bond,
paid for with county funds.
When the whole case shall be devel-
oped by testimony, | have no doubt it
will show greater loss than l have fig
ured.
Respectfully submitted.
JAMES ID. SNoDDY.
Mr.. Snoddy then gives in detail the
testimony taken by him. We see that
Senator Plumb was acting ms agent for
the county, in selling its stock in the NJ.
X. 81 L. and the A. L. IL S. f. Il. II. and
in purchasing the bonds of the county is
sued to those railroads. The evidence
shows that he bought and sold some OF
the stocks and bonds on his own account I;
or ut least in his own name.
After the report of Mr.. Snoddy was
made, and also of the county attorney,
who went TO Boston and New York in
the interests of the county, the county
board after reciting that the suit was
brought without authority, and by parties
who had no interest iii the sub
ject matter, directed the county attorney
ut the next term OF the district court, to
dismiss the suit ST the same time the
board directed the county attorney to
bring suit against the accused parties,
when testimony enough was presented
to him to make prilna ftcie case.
1t would seem from this that the coun-
ty board have no desire To shield any one
from wrong doing, if Il prima fdcie case
is shown. 1t is equally evident that the
board don't want to have Il suit conducted
in its name which it has not authorized,
and over which it has no control. We
have no desire to mix in this matter, and
would not at this time have referred to
it, had we not been blamed for stating as
we did on the authority of the News
thUt no case had been madc.-Common-
wealth
We copy the above for the purpose of
assuring the Commonwealth that every
statement it made ON authority of The
NEWS Is correct. The committee" or
Mr. Snoddy first charged that fraud of
S11G,2IS IL had been committed. He went
east and took testimony, early in Sep
TENDER, and three days before the cleo
ton made his report, dropping the al
lodged fraud from S116,218. IL to $1,000 or
$10,0SJ-hc don't appear to know which.
And for all the charges, first and last,
from $116,21S.12 down to $4,000, he of
fers no better evidence than his own as
sertion. 1t is because he furnishes no
testimony to prove his charges that the
board has ordered the suit dismissed, to
save county expense, and has authorized
the new commissioner, Mr.. j. NJ. Grit
fifth, who is not in any way party to the
suit, and also authorized the county at
torncy, to bring suit in the name of the
board whenever any person will furnish
evidence which, III the opinion of either,
is sufficient to base a suit upon. We
have urged throughout that the suit be
brought to trial. We regret it has been
dismissed, and hope Mr.. Snoddy or
somebody else will furnish Mr.. Griffith
or the county attorney with evidence
enough to warrant them in bringing
suit. 1t looks as if the board, like
most people. evidently considers
the suit was brought merely for polIti-
cal purposes, and hence has taken
steps to prevent the county from being
saddled with the expenses, and Will let
Mr.. Snoddy or the committee pay for
legal services.
1t is singular fact that while Mr..
SnoddY took the testimony early in Sep
TENDER, it did not arrive here for record
until the week before the election, and
would not then have seen the light of
day, only we happened to get hold of it
and published it against the objections
of the committee. Had we not pub
lished the testimony, the public would
never have known what it was, and Mr.
Snoddy's report, made public two months
after he took the testimony and three
days before the election, for which lie
might not have been to blame, might have
had the political effectit was evidently in
tended to bring about We are in favor
of the suit being put through, but we OBJ
jected to its being used as mere politi-
cal trick, and the testimony taken by
Mr.. Snoddy so utterly fails to prove his
charges, from first to last, that we can
really see nothing but Il political trick
in the suit, at least so far as the insti.
gators of it are concerned. And very
sorry failure it has been for those trick
sters.
EDUCATIONAL MEETINGS.
We have received the following mott