Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1881-11-12
Oa. DAVIS REPLY.

public:
), desire to notice an article In the Lexington
Intelligencer, Of date the nd inst. headed
"The County Judges Answer An Attachment"
In which I feel q crest injustice 10 done me.
The judges Of the county court allege that I par
ticipated In the convention held by the citizens
of lafayette county, In November. 1876. and
that I there voted to compromise the bonds In
question ct 20 cents on the dollar. and that In
December Of the same year. ct an election held
to test the sense Of the people or the coun-
~, voted to compromise at 10 cents on the doll
lars all OF which 10, to the best Of ny knowledge,
untrue. was In favor OF compromising the
debt Of the county ss will more fully
appear hereafter in this article. did
not vote in the convention nor at the
polls to compromise the bonds here
alluded to at 20 cents on the dollar. Had these
bonds Chat everybody admits are the only rail-
road bonds that are legal that have been issued
by the county, been PLACED at 50 cents on
the dollar, would cheerfuIly have voted for the
proposition. The election held In December,
1875. was Voted On by ballot. for or against the
compromise. voted at that election and am
satisfied in my own mind thatI voted ag sinst
the compromise; for ny sense Of right and my
interest would both have prompted mo to do 50.
few days ago and asked permission to examine
the ballots cast at that election. He very kindly
informed me that he WAS not permitted under
the law, to show them to me; bus said he would
examine and see ifths ballots for that year had
been preserved, II so, he said could ascertain
by counsel how to get possession Of them to de-
termine the fact as 10 how voted; but on exam
nation, found the ballots for 1875 had not been
preserved. Hence, the county judges must
have taken It for granted that, % voted at that
election, I must have voted for the compromise
| at 10 cents On the dollar, while am sstisf1ed.
for reasons above given, did not vote for the
eompromlse afro cents on the dollar. Before
disposed Of nay bonds, I addressed D letter to
the county court, telling Bheun held seven La
fayette county bonds for one thousand dollars
each with the interest that had accrued since the
county treasurer had ceased to pay the interest.
and that il the court would pay me the amount
due, would give the county -. 900, to which
Mr.. VIM. b. Steele replied for the court. In
substance. that the court could not entertain the
proposition. Being dssirous Of settling and ar-
ranging the matter with the country court, and
being pressed for money to meet my obligations.
went before the court In person, while the
court was In session. and proposed to the court.
| II they would settle my debt aEainst the county.
would give the county o.. 800. further told
| the court that had been ono among the largest
tax payers Of the county; that had paid my
| taxes promptly, and that thought an sxamina-
Non of the tax books would show that had paid
nearly or quite - much money into the county
treasury for taxes as the county owed me. and
| that 1t was unjust 10 require OF me the same
compromise As eastern men who had bought
| their bonds at much less figures than had and
who had never paid ono dollar Of tax into the
county treasury. But all my efforts proved
| fruitless, they would do nothing; hence, was
| compelled. as best I could to dispose or my
| bonds elsewhere. have been . taxpayer
in the state Of Missouri for forty years, and In
! Lafayette county for nineteen years. always
paying my taxes promptly. which think should
entltle me to some consideration by all fair
minded mcn. In regard 10 the Lafayette county
bonds sued on by the First National bank Of JEFF
| ferson City. formerly owned by me, have
| simply this TO say, that twhlle much dislike to
| thrust apon the public my private anairs) my
| Necessities were such that 1t became necessary
! fer me in arranging the same to raise money.
| and for that purpose transferred said bonds 10
| said bank. aud thereby raised money to meet
most pressing wants. So much for the state-
| msnt Of the county court Judges in the article
| above referred to. Tho Intslligeneer, in Its
! comments on the subjsct. reminds mo Of man
who. embracing you a. . friend with one arm.
stsbs you at the same time with the other. For
instance, 1t says. 1T 10 but fair 10 state Col .
DAvis' position regarding these bonds. that
| the bonds were not received. IS has been AL
legged, - salary while he Was an ofioer Of the
road, but that ave thousand dollars was received
for property South street, and the balance for
| CATTLE" 30. In the article published. referred
| to above, the county court judges do not claim
or state that received the bonds for my servi-
ces while an ofaeer Of tho road, nor have ever
| heard before that 1t was 30 charged; hence the
Intelllgenecr must speak out and give Its author-
! ity for the charge, or stand responsible for IT,
In conclusion, do most positively assers that
mover owned bond that did not pay Its face
value, dollar for dollar; that never did receive
| bond or bonds Of Lafayette or any other eoun-
| ty, for my services as q member Of the board Of
directors of the Lexington and st. Louis rail-
road company, or while I was president Of the
| same; aud the man who makes the assertion
doo me great ipjustics and states that which 10
net true. JOSEPH DAVIS.
Lexington, Mo-, Oct. 70, 1851.