The Middleburgh post. [volume] (Middleburgh, Snyder Co., Pa.) 1883-1916, 1888-01-12

SVuHs AAONoc ts>ss WOCS OvCscs " ~>@fsc
we're objected to but all were passed
excepting one. a payment Of e7io to
n. n. Grimm, Esq. The facts In this
case were briefly as follows
1t seems there were number Of ,
entitled to credit with the
State for State taxes paid, or articles
not properly taxable for State pur-
poses since 1874 Several attorneys
In Philadelphia aud Chester county
had offered their services to secure
credits for these counties for large
fees. Our own county had
their services. Chester and
other counties went into the arrange.
ment and the issue was raised before
the Auditor General, State Treasurer,
and Attorney General, and the Court
OF Common Pleas Of Dauphin County,
with "a favorable result to these coun.
ties, which practically settled the
question for all, aud IL thus became II
mere matter of the adjustment OF the
credit due the county. After the de-
cision the Chester County Commis
sioners refused payment and the at
torneys brought suit. The Supreme
Court adjudged 1t to be against pub
lie policy for County Commissioned
to enter into contract for contin>
gent fees. The books In the State
Department showed our own county
to be entitled TO n credit ofsometbing
like $1775. Yet, notwithstanding the
fact that no Mitigation was necessary,
and I'm the face OF the decision In the
Chester county case, two OF our Com
missioners. Messrs. Mohn and Houser,
entered into contract with Mr..
Grimm on the 27th of May last, by
which they agreed to pay him forty
per cent. OF the credit due the county
for securing its adjustment OF her
credit. Mr.. Erdley, according to the
Testimony. earn estly protested against
this agreement. Ou the 27th OF Aus
gust, last, after the Commissioners
had been notified that our county
had been reached in the adjustment,
and our treasurer formally credited
with the amount of her share Of over
paid taxes, the County Treasurer was
induced to pay Mr.. Grimm the $40
without an order, and to take MIR.
Grimm's receipt therefore on the
back OF the agreement. Subsequent
lly, on Dec. IA, lie secured an order
covering the same payment, signed
only by two of the Commissioners,
Messrs Mohn and Houser.
Ex.Conmissioner Erdley, tho new
Commissioners, and u number of the
taxpayers objected before the audi
tors to allowing credit for this pay.
ment. They secured the services ol
+. T. Bower. Esq, to assist Horace
; Alleman, ESQ.,, solicitor for the Com
missioners, in contesting the matter
, before the auditors. The auditors
3 gave the matter thorough investi
D CATION. A number OF witnesses wer,
subpoenied and all parties in any
|, way interested in the transaction
were examied under oath. During
the investigation ~ was discovered
that the bill presented by Mr.. Grimm
to the Commissioners contained th'
remarkable statement that more thar
''one- -half'' OF his fee had been "paic
, out for assistance, etc.h Or beint
questioned as to whom he had mad,
these payments, he could tell OF M
one except Mr.. Calvin Stetler, Ex
Commissioners Clerk, but could no
tell whether he had paid him five
dollars or five hundred dollars, mol
could the most industrious examin'
alton induce him to recall to within
twenty-five dollars how much he hao
= paid Mr.. Stetler, or what services Mr.
} Stetler had performed, except tina
he had done 'some writing" No
= could Mr.. Grimm give avery satisfac
a tory account Of what legal services
:. he, himself. had performed In thu
matter. He also testified that he hat
intended giving Ex-Commissionel
+ Houser $50 but afterwards had he
I" come offended at him from some
D cause and had given him nothing
s When Mr.. Ststler was upon the wit
{" ness stand, his memory also forsool
! him on this particular point, and h
could not tell within $25 the amoun
he had received or the extent OF ser
!. vices rendered. The auditors after
o patient investigation of the case, sur
n charged Ex-Commissioners Mohn ant
h Houser and Ex-Treasurer BolendeI
g with $81O.OO-thus allowingthess Of
a ficers credit OF $4,000 for "lega
i services" which they were really com
4 PEELED to guess at.
n 1t was a case OF unusual interest
4 and extended to all parts OF tn
t county, A high .meed Of praise il
q due to our present board Of Commis
d sioners, to Ex-Commissionsr Erdley
l who first brought the attention O
o the public to this matter, to the At
: torneys for the vigilent prosecution o
r the case and defense of right, to the
citizents who boldly stood up agains
b wrong. and last but not least to o.u
l. board OF County Auditors In thei
a impartial and upright course for pro