Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1888-03-16
The Record Of the Present
Council.

that the purpose of the article was to
show the true present financial condition
of the city. | did this. as much to prove
that Stanton is a good place to live and
own property into which, every true
citizen will assent-as to vindicate the
financial policy of the present council. In
doing so, l accorded to Mr.. Cochran the
same credit that was claimed for other
members of the council who voted with
him for new pump and pump-houss,
costing 81. 203 so; an alms-house. costing
complete, So 500 90; an electric light plant
for streets. costing SO. 27005 making a
total of 1918 IS. all Oh which has been
paid IN cash, with the exception of So 400,
which was paid by bonds having .one and
two years to run.
1t is true, he did not vote to adopt the
plans and specifications agreed upon for
the white school building, but that was not
considered as anything to his discredit,
for 1t was supposed he had reasons suffi-
GENTLY satisfactory to himself for taking
such action. He tells us now he was
'.wiIing to spend some 1000 or 81 900 i'm
proving the old Wesleyan Institute build
ing, and from 81 900 to 5000 improving
the present coored schoohOuse on old
Markeu-hou5e lot. " So, it would seem after
all, he was very liberal in regard to expen-
ditures.
Mr.. Cochran's character was not assail-
ed in any way, nor we're his motives OR &C.
lions impugned. Then way should he be-
come FESTIVE under weight OF duty we'll
performed, and deem it necessary to appear
ia lengthy article filled, the most
part. with mere personal alluS ons. He
knew before his communication appeared
in print, that the ''Valley Vjrgipian'' had
published an extract from letter written
by gentleman in another city of the
State, asking whether it was true that
the present council had run the City
$50, 900 or $75, 900 in debt, and had attack
ed the sinking fund and reissued bonds
which Lad oeen redeemed, and so hurt the
credit of the city. that bonds that brought
10S, cannot now be sold for 100." Know
ing this and similar reports to ba untrue,
it would seem to me to be rather the duty
of good citizen to deny all such, than To
apparently ldorse them, by attempting to
prove the city finances have been most
disastrously managed, and thereby give
some found ton for such reports.
In my asst article l made four state
ments as follows:
First-Thaf the bonded debt of the city
has been increased by this council only
$14 900. Which fact Mr.. Cochran had to
admit.
Second-That by its financial pol icy, it
has added to the value OF tho civy 3 assets,
Numerous useful and permanent improve
ments worth Soc. 15S.40. Which statement
Mr.. q. did MOI ndeitake to disprovt.
Third-That the city now has contracts
for the sale of commercial electric lights,
amounting to about $2,775 per annum,
and that the street lights for the year 1887
had cost about 81 500; neither of which
statements does Mr.. Cochran attempt to
dlsprOve.
Fourth-That the sinking fund has oeen
il creased fir ON $57 1903 43 to $40, 3I7 IS.
The law provides, that there shall be
added to the sinking fund each year sum
equal to one per cent. of the bonded in
debtedness of the city, and that the inter
est accruing on the bonds held by said
fund, shall at their maturity, and not before
be converted into cash and added to prln-
cipal of the sinking fund. Aud it is like
wise contemplated, that all cash turned
into the sinking fund, shall be safely in
vested IN interest paying bonds. thereby
compounding the interest accrulng to
said fund. 1t Was not claimed in my for
mer article that the present council had
placed in the sinking fund any more than
the law required, but it Is claimed now,
that said council has put into and set apart
for the exclusive use of said fund, such
sums of cash and its equivalent, as would
max sud sinking fund over So 600 in excess
of what the law prescribes, and not $50 less
than it should be, as asserted by Mr..
Cochran. I shall refer to these last two
items further on.
1t is a matter Of little financial impor
tance. as Mr.. e. well knows, which Coun-
cil-whether the present or the former one
should have increased the sinking fund
by the amount of one per cent. of the
bonded debt for the year 1886 'S7; but it IS
in respect to the time and manner in which
the transfer was made that | shall allude.
| was sufficiently well acquain ted with the
nature of the bonds in the sinking fund,
to know that it held no bonds upon which
interest would accrue between June l, 'S6,
and July lst of same year. l likewise
knew that it had never been customary to
transfer from the general revenue fund,
the one per cent. OF the bonded debt
(Which is always provided for in the tax
bill made up at the beginning OF each fiscal
year, until after July 1st of each year-for
confirmation see Council records for pre-
vious years-so that, when | turned to the
last and only report the Treasurer made
to the Council in June, 'S6, giving state
ment of the amount held oy che sinking
fund committee as $57 1903 ,43. [ verify
believed that amount was, and as matter
OF fact and precedents it should have been,
for the reasons given, the true amount
held in the sinking fund on June 80. 'S6.
But Mr.. Cochran tells Us that the
Chairman of the Sinking Fund Com
mittee of OLD Council, turned over to him
as of June 80, 'S6, sinking fund amount
ing to SOL 7G3 ~, and with the air of one
who has discovered a ''N,are's nest" he
asks me; now what have you get to say?
answer simply this: That since his ar
ticle appeared in print. l have made an
of the resolutions passed. by
the Council on June %. '86, and find that
S. 010,00 or one per cent. of tbs then bond
ed debt. was ordered to he transferred (con-
tra4y to all precedents) to the sinking fund
COMMITTEES, ard by reference to the books
of the Treasurer. find be Was ordered at
the same time. by the ehaifna of said
committee, to credit on his books the ac-
count Of the sinking fund with $l,45O 90;
it being the interest coupons clipped from
The bonds held by said fund, but achich auere
not due untsI July l., 's6, otter tie present
these two sums. viz: SO 01G, 90 and ST 450
from the amount turned oyer TO Mr. COch- |
ran, and you will see the assault is $57 303,-
ia-the amount that would b ave been held
by the sinking fund, under ordinary Cur
l leave you to draw your own conclu-
,iCns as to why this was do @.
Mr.. COCHRAN lays great stress upon his /,
supposed find OF shortage Of $50 IN the |
sinking fund, which 10 accounted for as
follows: The Treasurer was instructed TO
pass certain collections to the credit of |
said fund to meet the SIS. 900 bonds given for |
he street light plant and which matured |
snd were paid on June |. s8Y, and Dec. l, |
81. Up &c the present time the Treasur=
n has passed oni3 81 $40 to credit of such |
'und. thereby apparently showing it to be |
short $50. This apparent shortage is ex-
blamed below.