Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1882-07-01

A subject to which we briefly alluded, last
week, deserves to be more fully spoken Of,
that the peoples minds may b reireshsd
upon,it. sndthst crsdit may be done certain
gentlemen TO whom 1t IS due. The csc OF
the state to the use of Lafayette county
against James O'dorman and hia, secnrities
on his bond as county court CLERK, In which
q judgment for s. 900, In favor OF the coun.
ty, was rendered by the circuit court OF La.
fayette county some three years sgo. sod In
which the taxpayers OF our county have
felt SO lively an interest, was on the 18th
ult., affirmed by the supreme court OF the
state, to which 1t had been sppeslsd BY the
defendants. AMI thus IL ended that series OF
suits, SO faithfully prosecuted by the county
for the last seven years in order to compel
Mr.. O'Gormsn to account for the large sur
of fees received by him as county CLERK,
as re quirsd by the constitution and lava.
over aud above the liberal amounts allowed
him and his deputies by the law. First 10
order, was q suit in equity commsnced In
March 1879. to set aside and vacate certain
man to be entered and made by the Ambrose
court in regard TO the fees received by him
for 1871. 1872 sId 1873, charged to be fsfse
and fraudulent. This suit was taken by
O'Gorman, by! change OF yenueto Ray coun-
ty, and alter much delay u decree was made
vscsling aud setting aside such settlements
as fraudulent. In the mean time, and in
order to prevent the cause of action against
O'Gorman and his seelriiiss from being
$50. k, tha tVrtlo-o m e,,SH
had been commepced on his official bond o.
clerk and retained as lohg, W. It. couldlbs be-
fore u non-suit should lie AIKEN. After the
making OF the decree setting aside the set
Elements. u citation was, ID May 1877. Issued
against O'tiorman citing him to appear In
the conntycoprt and make 81 u and correct
settlements. aud on his failure the county
court proceeded to settle bis, accounts on the
best evidences they could get. sud then, In
July 1877. commenced u new suit on his
bond. which alter . change Of venue 70 Ray
county. resulted In y judgment for the coun-
ty for $5. 900. IN May 1879, and which YVES
affirmed by the supreme court on the l9ih
instant, as remarked above. In oil Of this
litigation. Ms,srs. Wallace Il IIChtiss, the
county's attorneys, have been unremittipg
in their labors and untaltsring In their faith
OF ultimate SUCCESS !; ons iof the tirm. ct one
time going all the way to Florida to get the
deposition Of Geo. H.. Ambrose, .formsr
county judge, which was maternal for tie
county. They have naturally had to con.
tend all the =whilss witaasheApersssssas spS
position OF the defendants attorneys, whsse
ingenuity and skill we're used to relieve Mr..
O'Gorman and his securities from4isbiiity
on his bond. Messrs. Wallace 4 Chilss do.
serve the c~ommendstlons and thanks Qf the
people, especially the taxpayer. for their
ability, zesl and unremltting lsbsrs In these
cases sthrough ahlthese years, - docs the
county court for Its zeal IN the matter, and
especial praise is due to our, efficient snd
worthy county clerk, Mr.. VIM. II. stsss,
who discovered the facts and pressed them
on the attention. Of thu court, upon Whtch
the prosecution was based and sustained. "A
motion was made, this week, before the
supreme court, fora rshearlnkpfetha saasss
but 1t vas promptly overruled. The judg-
ment now with Interest, viii amount to
about $1,000. and % fthsssecurifT islsnn|y
good, 1t will be recovered. So here IL one
instances at 1easte In which iitiGasion - q;
county TO maintain the law, to ~-yindicsts
justrce and to protect the interests OF the
people has been snccsssfpl,s k.kEs rad