The Democratic press. [volume] (Ravenna, O. [Ohio]) 1868-1901, 1892-12-07
AND OPTICIAN,

road commissioners, had established the grade
of the hills leading from the culvert, it was
five feet in length instead of thirty feet
This change in the construction, made some
time after the contract was entered into. to-
gether with the fact that nearly all the stones
removed from the old culvert proved worth
less, necessitated additional expense in the cost
of the Improvement, making the total cost
thereof more than one thousand dollars while
the original contract pric e was below that sum.
In my opinion, these circ cumstances were not
and could not easily be anticipated.
To stop the work when the old culvert was
torn out. and when it was found necessary to
build more expensive one tnan was hrst con
tracted for and advertise under and comply
with section SIT of the Revised Statutes would
greatly impede the work of the commissioners
in the construction of said pike, interfere with
public travel and work great public lnconven
ience and Unjust &C..
AS TO the aurora bridge referred to in the
third sub b-division of the report, will say that
have personally given the matter no investi-
CATION, as the contract made for the same was
executed subsequent to the time covered by
your committees report. Upon information,
however, ] will say that somewhat similar
state OF affairs exist In relation to this i'm
provement as does in the case OF tho Hiram Gull
vert.
visions of section 87o of the Revised Statutes,
by the commissioners, would In the future OBJ
viate all like entanglements.
AS to the Improvement made in the ''Way
Creek Improvement, beg leave to dissent
from the report made.
The improvements sought were necessary
ones and proper to be made under our laws.
The question of damages to land owners, and
the oefraying of the necessary expenses of
making the improvenent- involve intricate
The army of the petitioners for the improve
ment was outnumbered by the legion of its
opponents. Ambitious attorneys threatened
the commissioners with endless litigation un-
less the m prOVement was a5andOned; and. be-
lieving that some of the questions involved
were "mooted'' ones, and believing they were
serving the best interests OF the public in SO
doing. they entertained and granted the pet1-
ton to abandon the proposed improvement. 1
cannot think that in taking such action they
were rash and inconsiderate, but can only
look upon them in their dilemma as being like
the fellow who, ever since November s. has
continuously exclaimed, where are we @ at?"
visions of the report. am clearly OF the
opinion that a county commissioner is entitled
to receive mileage Tor necessary travel while
attending regular or special sessions of the
board of commissioners or when engaged in
official business either within or without the
In my Judgment, in the several vouchers of
the fifth sub division of the report, neither Mr..
ceived anything in excess of what they were
entitled to receive under the provisions of Sec
ton S97 of the Revised statutes.a
AS to the seventh subdivision of the report
I find that the commissioners have substan-
italy compliez with the Statutes in the mat
tiers therein complsined of. The amounts
charged by them respectively fer their quar-
terly expenses in travelling within the county
upon official business are very meager, aver
aging, GnlnK, lees Gndh elSu1 uoIiaIS per
quarter.
In my opinion they would lawfully be en-
titled to receive a much larger sum.
Referring to the item OF fourteen dollars and
forty-fiye cents mentioned in the last sub-divi-
sion of the majority report, L find no reason
for changing nv opinion given in the last an
nual report of the examining committee as to
that expenditure. By the action of the board
of commissioners one of its members attended
a state convention of county commissioners
held at Columbus. His actual necessary ex-
penses were fourteen dollars and forty. five
cents which sum was paid him out of the
treasury of the county.
/ rep5at that the expenditure was in the in
terests of the taxpay ers of the county, was
judicious, proper. and in my opinion, legal,
Respectfully submitted,
l. H. PHELPS,
December j. 1892, Prosecuting Attorney.