The Democratic press. [volume] (Ravenna, O. [Ohio]) 1868-1901, 1892-06-22
Council Proceedings.

At the adjourned meeting of the Council Mon
day night the minutes of the preceding session
were read and approved.
The matter that particularly engaged their
attention was the action of City Treasurer Grun-
del in claiming that the per cent. interest on
the park fund, which he deposited under direc-
ton of Council with W. ]. Hayes & Sons. Cleve-
land bankers. belonged to him. instead of the
city, This question came up at a previous meet
ing, occasioning long session. which was con-
cluded by appointing the Mayor and Solicitor a
committee to go to Cleveland and investigate
matters.
At that meeting no one seemed to know wheth-
er or not Grundel had furnished bond for the
$100. 600. or in fact much of anything pertaining
to the sale of the bonds and the keeping and
disposition of the proceeds. 1t was said that
when the bonds were sold. Hayes & Sons gave a
certificate of deposit to the Treasurer for $100 O0
and it was supposed by one or two present thai
Hayes & Sons furnished collaterals, but no one
knew positively. Under the arrangement, the
city was to have the 100000 in Hayes bank and
receive thereon 4 per cent. interest. and pay
per cent, really making per cent. net for the
city to pay.
December 18th. when the first installment Of
interest. to-wit. $1,000. fell due. Hayes & Sons
gave the city credit for $1,000. and the city paid
them 81 200. as per the original agreement.
June 18th, the time the second installment fell
DUE the city was about to repeat the same pro-
ceedings, when in came Gruudel and claimed
that the per cent, interest belonged to him, by
virtue of law. His claim was based on the prop
osition that a mere custodian of the fund. he
was accountable only for its safe keeping. and
that Council had no authority to dictate to him
L L L. L. IL.
600. or in fact what disposition to make of it
That when he had given proper security for its
safe keeping. his obligations to the city ceased
beyond that, and that whatever interest the fund
earned in the meantime. belonged to him.
Last February Grundel drew out $45, 900 for the
city. taking new certificates of deposit. one for
$4,000 and one for $1l. 600. drawing per cent
For some reason. however, he surrendered the
collaterals so that all this time the city has been
absolutely without any security for the S55, ,00C
in his hands. save $4,000 bond furnished by
him when he took his Office of Treasurer, and
the certificate of deposit before mentioned.
Hayes & Sons say that Instead of giving GER
tificate of deposit for the 100000. they gave a
note for that amount to the city. with $125,00O
security. Council had said all along that it was
certificate of deposit.
A bond was prepared by the Solicitor for $751;
600, to be signed by W. T. Grundel. W. j. Hayes,
II. E. Hayes. and W. J. Hayes & Sons, when ap-
proved by Council.
Council further instructed the Solicitor and
Treasurer to obtain collateral security for the
$55. GOO in addition to the bond of the Hayes.
The Solicitor said that the Treasurer came to
him some time ago about the matter. and he told
him Council had no right to dictate where the
money should be deposited. The Solicitor then
reported, on behalf of Mr.. Grundel, that Coun-
Gil ought to pay him reasonable compensation
for the charge of the fund. He did not suggest
any amount to Grundel but would suggest to
Council 800 per year.
Several members had notion to object to this,
as Grundel is entitled by law to a per centage
for handling the fund. and has already realized
over $400 in cold cash from it.
It is probable that settlement of this kind
will be made at the adjourned meeting tomorrow
night.
Whatever Grundel's legal rights may be. the
city is morally entitled to the per cent. espe-
calIy as Grundel was party to the contract with
the Hayes. and acted under direction of Council.
We think he ought not to touch penny beyond
his regular commission, which has already netted
him a very handsome little sum.