Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1881-04-16

ceeding further, that on the LIST of
March 1879, at our 18th meeting, the
resignation of Judge C. G.. Smith
was received and at the April term,
one month later, Esq /. p. Howard
was elected by the court in his
stead.
There being no law to regulate
the pay of the commissioners, they
themselves fixed the rate at the
same paid to members of the coun-
ty court serving on committees,
which is 81. per day exclusive of
toll, and mileage, the secretary be-
ing allowed in addition to this fif-
ty cents for his extra labor, and ex-
pense of recording the proceedings
of all meetings, furnishing reports
to each term of the county courts,
writing, and copying contracts, do
ing the correspondence, furnishing
stationary, stamps, envelops etc.
This extra pay of fifty cents which
was entirely unexpected, was at first
refused by the secretary, but after
some consideration, (and it did not
take him long to decide it was ac-
cepted for two reasons. First, be-
cause he believed that it was hon
estly earned, and secondly, because
it would be a thing so strange for
an official to refuse to accept public
money when offered, (whether
earned or not,) that the people of
the county would not be able to full
ly comprehend it. / think that I
should not myself.
The books of the commissioners
show that for their services of about
two and a half years, the commits
sioners have received 1870 AZ, in
Guiding toll, and mileage, which is
the entire aggregate, so far as | have
any knowledge of, to this time.
AS | have incidentily learned of
certain insinuations having been
made in regard to visits to Chatta-
nooga, Cincinnati, L will IS brief
Iy as possible explain the objects of
those visits, and the terms upon
which they were made.
The trip to Chattanooga was made
in June 1879, for the purpose of in
specting its new Court House just
then completed at a cost of 81, 900,
with a view of trying to obtain
some information that might be
beneficial in the construction of
our own.
The railroads furnished us free
passes, we pail our own hotel bills,
and other expenses and if the visit
cost the county a single dime, / do
not know of the fact. The trip to
Cincinnati was made in September
1880, for the purpose of Investigating
steam-heating arrangements, and
the price of furniture. On this trip
the county furnished the railroad
tickets which were purchaed at $12.-
80 each to Cincinnati, and return,
(about one halt of the usual fare
and the commissioners paid their
hotel bills, and all other expenses.
This trip cost the county, for four
commissioners, and the architect,
$6I.75.
The proposals made by Cincin-
natl manufacturers TO supply the
furniture being deemed too high,
three of the commissioners myself
among the number), were appoint
ed to go to Nashville to investigate
the furniture market there. We
were absent between three and four
days, at a cost of $34 fot railroad
fare and hotel bills /; but whilst
there, perfected such arrangements
as enabled us to contract for the
furniture at a saving to the county
of over $1,000, as compared with
Cincinnati prices.
As something has been said about
an extra payment of $645 for de-
tailed drawings, [ will try to state
the facts in regard to that case. Mr..
Bunting, the original architect OF
the building, who furnished the
plans and specifications, and whose
duty it was to furnish all necessary
drawings, after a time ceased his
connection with the building, and
refused to furnish further drawings,
though written to by the secretary
for them. AS these detailed draw
ings were absolutely necessary, Mr..
Rosenplaenter, the supervising
architect, was asked to make an es-
innate of their cost, which he did,
stating the amount to be 1925. He
was then requested to have them
made, and employed an assistant
(as l suppose) for that purpose.
After they completed, he
stated at a meeting of the commits
sioners that a great many more
drawings had been required than
he expected; that the cost to him
had been much more than 1925,
and requested the board to allow
him a sufficient amount to pay
their actual cost. He further said,
that owing to the absence of his as
sistant, he did not then know the
exact amount due, but as the
money would be needed by the said
assistant previous to our next meet.
ing, he would request that the
chairman be authorized to settle the
difference. At our next meeting
the chairman reported as having
settled the matter by paying $42(
in addition to the 1926 named, and
accompanying his report was the
certificate of Mr.. John Grove, the
assistant architect, as proof of his
statement to that effect. 1t is but
proper to state, that in accordance
with the original contract made
with Mr.. ROsenplaenter, it was not
a part of his duty to furnish the
drawings named, and if the cost of