Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1888-03-30
The Record of the Present
Council.


When you offered the use of your COL
umns for an exposition of the city IS fnan.
cial condition, doubtless you little jmag-
ined you would have to surrender your en-.
tie editorial page for such purposes. N or
would you. if Mr.. Cochran would confne
himself to an attempt at dlSprOval of the
statements | made in my first and second
articles in regard to the present financial
condition of the city, as compared to what
it was when this council went into office.
But instead Of doing SO, be passes over the
very glst Of the subject, (thereby tacitly
admitting the truth Of what have said ]
and rambles through all the little side issues
that could be culled from the record,
and ampllfes them to such an extent, that
he really seems to believe he has proven
something pertinent to the main question.
AS matter OF fact, his arguments no
more disprove the statements have made
as above referred to. than would deter
mination of the number of pegs in his
boots, prove the number of stars that CON-
pose the milky way.
In the outset, [ wish to correct Mr..
Cochran in regard to conversation be
says he had with me, wherein ''he prop o.
ed to expeni $4,000 or $4,000 on the
schools, ana [ replied 'that amount would
not be drop III the bucket" l am quite
sure he has gotten me COMPOUNDED with
some one else that may have made sims
liar remark to him on that subject. AS
Mr.. g. says: HE differed very greatly
with the present council in its actions
while he was a member thereof, +" and Tor
that very reason L had few conversations
with him on any subject. and Can easily
recall the few had; and | certainly can
not recall the one above referred to, or
anything similar to it.
Mr.. Cochran tells US 1.-THE city had $40,
500 of per cent. bonds redeemable at
pleasure of the council, Nov. l, SO. and
that he knew the city could not borrow
$40 500 in cash, to take up these bonds,
&c." and then he speaks OF himself as "a
layman with rather crude ideas about
financial matters" and proceeds to show
how, as chairman of the sinking fund
committee, he came to the rescue of the
city with $12, SIT. 43 cash in said fund, and
''arranged. not without some difficulty,
with Mr.. Bledsoe, Cashier National Va
ley Bank, to leu him have the amount of
money necessary to add to cash on hand,
to take up the bonds above described"
But note the glazing Inconsistency of the
above statement in regard to the difficulty
the city met with in borrowing cash, when
compared with his next assertion, viz:
Had the city had the credit to have bor-
roWed the $40 500, to take up these bonds
Nov. l. 'S6, | would have been compelled
to have paid $l06 for Stanton bonds,
(siXes), and had l Invested the cash in.the
sinklng fund in these bonds, the city
would have lost $3.50 on the investment
&C." What a IT markabie state of affairs
A city, whose six per cent. bonds aUere
selma at O. premium, lot being able Tex
cept with some difficulty" to borrow
money on such security!
But what do the record and the Treas
urer'S books show in connection with the
above transaction2 Simply this: First,
That on Oct. 10, 'S6, the city ordinances
were amended SO as to make the CITY
Treasurer the custodian ef the sinking
fund; Second, That on Oct. 81, IS, MIR.
Cochran the foI mer custodian OF said fund,
turned over tc the Treasurer the entire
amount III his hands, belonging to such
fund; and Third, That on Nov. l., IS, the
Treasurer, by and with the advice Of the
Finance Committee, borrowed from the
National Valley Bank on his Dote as City
Treasurer, without endorsement, the sum
of Sc $50 81, which added to the cash then
held by said sinking fund, made $40 500,
the amount necessary TO take up the per
cent. bonds referred to; and there was
placed in SAID fund that amount In per
cent. bonds to be added to those already
on band. So far as the Treasurer and
Committee knew, Mr.. Cochran acaS moi
knoacn in thQt transaction, still he may
have paved the way for all this, without
their knowledge The borrowed money
above mentioned, has long since been paid
off by the Treasurer from the interest &C
cruing On the bonds held in the sinklng
fund, and by transfer to said fund of
the one per cent. of the bonded debt OF the
city. Since the occasion above referred to,
the Treasurer, without the slightest diff
Guilty, has made similar temporary loans
at the two banks, for the use of the sink
ing fund.
MIR. Cochran wants to know whether an
account allowed the Thomson HOuston
Electric Company for 1924 50 and charged
to the miscellaneous account, should not
be charged either against "construction
account" or running expense of the street