The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1879-02-06
THE woRLEY BILL.
The SuretIes Not Able to PAy-The BOndsmen Not
the Cause Of TesSler's ShOrlCOmlngs-The VueS-
finn Mere Bnslness Matter.

The Worley bill before the ONO Legs
lsture, which proposes to give certain
discretionary powers to the County Com
missioners, in efIecting their settlement
with the Fessler bondsmen, has been
pretty thoroughly discussed by the local
politicians this week. The fact that the
people have been indulgng the idea that
he bond was good, and that it would be
a comparatively easy job to collect from
the bondsmen the full amount OF the de-
falcation, is sufficient excuse for the
disfavor this bill meets inthe eyesofthe
taxpayers, until theyunderstand the real
state of affairs. Unfortunately for the
county, it is learned too late, that the
Fessler bond, by reason Of death, depre-
citation of values, and business failures,
there are but comparatively few left to
bear the burden of the heavy defalca'
ton, and the paying ability of these
even, falls far below the amount OF the
deficit. For this statement we have the
authority of a number of the best in
formed men in the county, who have
made it their business to learn the 6nan'
clal responsibility of this bond, with the
above result.
This bill is of no political significance
whatever, and can never develope into a
party issue We are informed that about
an equal number of both parties are on
the bond, and large number of leading
Republicans in the county are decidedly
favorable to the passage of the bill. 1t
is simply question of dollars and cents
to the county. Will we save more mon
ey by compromising with the bondsmen
at a figure within their ability to pay, or
by engaging in litigation for the purpose
of securing the entire amount ? The
county has no quarrel with these bonds.
men. They we're not the cause of Mr..
Fessler's shortcomings. Therefore it is
not for the purpose of infcting punish
ment upon them, that this money is to
be collected, but as we said before, it is
only question of dollars and cents.
Now, how would a business man de-
eide a question of this kind in his pr
vate affairs? Would he at once appeal
to the law without first ascertaining the
ability of the debtor to pay2 A wise
business man would pursue a different
course. Even if he thought his claim
could be made, he would prefer a reason
able compromise, to entering upon an
expensive and tedious litigation, the
final result of which is always doubtful.
In this case, we are informed by reli-
able legal authority, that the bOndsmen
will make a much better defense than
is generally supposed. 1t will be shown
that a large part of the defalcation occur
red during Fesslers first term of Office,
The County Commissioners settled with |
Mr.. Fesser and released his bondsmen |
at the close of the term, and of course
they are now beyond reach. As the
present bondsmen cannot be held for
efaIcation which existed before they
signed the bond, it becomes a question
of interest to know just how much the
original defalcation was and when it took
place. 1t may be for large amount or
it may be small. The proof alone will
show bow far these bondmen are respon.
ibe. With this state of affairs who
knows where it will end2
Again, there will grow out of this liti-
CATION an innumerable series of tedious
and expensive lawsuits.
The bondsmen, in view of this suit,
are already seeking cover. Some have
gone into assignment, and others have
covered their property with mortgages
to secure their own creditors, and there
is a strong probability that without some
sort of a compromise, the county may
find, after long years of litigation, ald
thousands of dollars spent in lawyers
fees and court costs, that it has gained
the fruitless victory of judgment but no
mOney. This result is in keeping with
eyery known precedent 1t may be con.
sidered a remarkable statement, but we
believe it is true, that neUer IN single IN
stance has either the State or a county
in collecting the amount of a
defalcation from an official bond. If
there is such case, it has never yet
come to our knowledge.
"Never throw good money after bad"
is an old saw, but very good advice, I'm
fortunately, however, ander the present
law, the Commissioners are left no dis.
cretionary powers in adjusting a claim
like this Their hands are tied; and if
they knew to a certainty that they could
save the county thousands of dollars by
a compromise, they have not the power
to act. The only way to reach the case
is by special legislation. This Mr.. Wor.
lev undertakes to do by the bill in ques.
ton. In order that our readers may
have correct idea of its import, we re
publish that section which relates to the
county funds:
SECTION /. Be II enacted By The General |
assembly of The State of Ohio, That the
Commissioners of Stark county be and
are hereby authorized, at their discre-
ion, to settle and compromise with the
,ureties on the official bond of George g
Fessler late treasurer of said county,and /
discharge them from liability upon the
pond of said Fessler, as treasurer of said
county, or any judgment that may be !
endered thereon, upon the payment or /
occurring to be paid upon time, not ex-
eeding three years, by them into the
reasury of said county, of such sum or :;
ums of money as to said commissioners Il
hall seem proper and expedient: provi- il
led that not less than thirty per centum ]
f the deficit in said county treasury, 7
rising from the defalCation of the said :,
feorge Fessler, late treasurer of said }
ounty, shall in the aggregate be paid or y
ecured to be paid, as aforesaid, into said j
0unty treasury; and provided further n
nat such compromise and settlement a
an only be made by unanimous vote n
the said Commissioners. :.
1t will be seen that this bill is carefully II
uarded. Any basis of settlement must b
ave the unanimous approval of the g