Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1881-02-25
STATEMENT No. 8.
Commissioner Stafford Hoes HIS Row
We'll

Commissioner Stafford Hoes HIS Row
Well.
II is the rule IN courts for the plaintiff
In cause to have the opening and closing
argument. In making this, my closing
argument In this case, I shall be MS brief,
pointed aud good natured as possible.
The first law referred TO by the Aud.
itor IN his defense, owit: IL. Vol. T6 ~
l24, il repealed; see II. S. Vol. 2p. l,s2l
sec. 1887 hence has no hearing, being re-
pealed Internationally leaving then MS
the only hope of defending his charges in
fees, section 1866 X. 5.
Now ask NIL parties interested in this
matter to read carefully this section ; not
part Of II, but all of il--notice the con-
nection, the punctuation, and the reference
to the sections IL cpnsolidatcs and revises,
and then decide whether II means what
the Auditor would have you think il means.
Take it together and 1t means one thing, but
separate it, destroy its connection, print it
in italics and il would seem to mean some
thing else. II is like contracts that people
sometimes sign for hay forks, etc. Togeth
er they are contracts, but when separated
they are notes. But admitting all they
claim it to near, and how can they
apply it to the ditch law, passed after that
and having no saving clause whatever? l
am satisfied and have the written opinion
of good attorneys to back me, that this sec
tion only refers to the power OF the Com
GERS fees or salary, and has no reference to
acts Of the legislature relative TO fees, or to
the question at issue. This being all the
law in the case, Ule $3.50 item running
through years being unanswered)it only re-
mains to examine the opinions in the case.
Through the kindness OF a friend am
furnished with copy of a letter from the
Attorney General, which in part explains
itself:
DEAR SIR Your favor of the Stl inst.
has been received. 1 am of the opinion
that county Auditor Is entitled to such
compensation only MS is provided for by
sections 1909 10 1918 inclusive. Section
| 1,07S seems to be very explicit upon the
point. III | am correct in the matter u
county Auditor. for services rendered under
sections u ,052, 1854, 1888 and 4,2l5, is not
entitled to compensation unless il is provid-
ed for by the section first referred 10 herein
by me.
G. X. NASH, Attorney General.
@These latter sections refer to dog tax
about which there is no question in our
county.
1t is plain that this opinion covers the
question at issue in our Co., and while sec
tion 4,506(or ditch section)is not mentioned,
it is implied that theAuditor must be govern
ed by the rates fixed in the revised statutes
and no more, which knocks off Is days as
member of the board OF equalization, the
$3.50 item, and gives him 8 cents ior road
and cents for ditch work.
As to the Auditor of State he refers as
basis for his opinion to o. l.. Vol. "a, p.
124 to 1913. This law was repealed unoondi-
tionally; see Vol.R.S. p. ,S06, section1 ,l57;
hence has no bearing on the case. Icannot
find wherein he is any persons advisor, yet
lie may be.
This is my case. Much might be said
| TO prejudice tne case pro anu COu, put INV
ing no desire for anewspaper war, | sub
nit it to jury of taxpayers on its own
merits, confident that l am right, and glad
to be able TO inform you that other coun
ties are moving in the matter and that this
question will be sifted. One commissioner
Informed me that the best attorneys in
his county claim that he is right, and fur
ther, that their board is not divided.
This is a question of law and justice, in
volving certain amounts for the year 1880
and covering lesser amount for this
year. These amounts belong to the people, or
they belong to their servants the officers. IL
il belongs 10 the officers they should have it,
and if not the people should haveit. We are
heavily taxed on account OF our improve
ments, and with many it is a hard strug-
gle to keep their homes ard provide Tor
their families. II is useless to say there is
no question at issue. The officers in some
counties are taking the present rates, salts
fed it is all they are entitled to. The
very fact of the Auditor taking pay for
two months under the ditch law, and then
writing for opinions on the law, is proof
that there is doubt in his mind.
Now for the way out. Let all the Off
GERS in our county interested in this ques
ton agree to submit it without delay and
unnecessary expense to the Supreme
Court, and the Commissioners on the part
of the people sign the agreement and al
abide in good faith by the decision.
n. w. STAFFORD.
Feb. lS. 1881,