The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1897-11-05


Mr., Spurrier was compelled to
yield.
On referring to Mr., Spurrier's art
icle In regard TO the fence l was
directed to repair, one would nat
urally conclude there was nothing
else TO be done. Suffice to say
there was not only fence repairing
but much other work with our ut
most efforts to do all we could, that
we did not get done, we did the
farming, hauled the coal aud at the
end of the first year Mr.. SpurrieI
remarked to me, they did not ex'
pect me to work so much.
Mr.. Wolf was not only in favor
of hireing me for the second year
but voted to give me twenty five
dollars more than the other two.
AS to meat being allowed to spoi
it was no fault of anyone. By mis-
take some side meat was salted in
barrel that had been used for
kraut, On examination early in
the season we found it not keeping
well, we raised, washed and re-
brlned it in another barrel think.
ing it all right, later when we wish
ed to use it, we thought it spoiled
and did not allow the inmates tC
use it, Although we very much
regretted the loss of the meat and
failed to inform the board of the
fact, but Mr.. Spurrier being inform
ed by that some one else, he did not
| fail to circulate il, without asking
me the facts of the case.
Some additional help was en-
ployed during harvest and corn
gathering which was advised by
the board If thought to be necess.
ary, which we claim was, we might
give our reason for claiming this
The larger part of these crops were
on the river bottom and the season
being very wet, we thought it ad-
visable to rush the crops offas soon
as possible. ...
When the time came to haul the
coal L had concluded it necessary
to put out much larger wheat
crop han had been done the two
preceding years as the number
of inmates had been steadily IN
,creasing and our supply of wheat
not meeting the demand. When
1 consulted the board in regard to
this, they,agreed to my suggestion
of having the coal delivered.
According to Mr.. Spurriers state
ment he inferes in cost 1892 TO haul
this 5000; bushels of coal, which is
not true, for there was over 5000
bushels bought and hauled for $l92
Furthermore we also hauled some
and during the hauling of this coal
we put in fifteen acres OF wheat,
which / am informed made yield
of over 81 bushels per acre. There
you have 4S0, bushels of wheat for
the hauling of the coal which cost
about $90.ynag j.. 1..i '. &.
Mr., Spurrier has called your at
tention to- i the difference in the
amount of corn at the time of TAX
ing charge and leaving the Insti-
tuition, but fails to say anything
a bout the difference in the number
OF hogs and cattle that were kept
during these two years, correspond
ing with the previous year, which
would have'much to do with the
in the corn. There was
over 5000 worth of corn and hogs
sodl during this time which would
be equivalent to 500 bushels of corn
at 40 cents besides a difference OF
cattle and hogs on hand at the time
we left which would easily equal
an other 900 bushels Had / been
given credit for this years crop OF
wheat instead OF the small amount
harvested the first year, and the
greater number of inmates to feed
being considered the wheat is read
ilv accounted for. No inmate was
ever treated unkIndly or punished
unnecessarily, and i am satisfied
Mr. Spurrier had no reasons for
.... ..43
Now he would have you believe
he took much interest in the tax
payers, but he fails to tell you that
his first objection in regard to me
was made to the other directors
after the meeting of the board with
The commissioners for settlement |
IN September 1896. ....
Now from the reading of Mr..
Spurrier's article one might con-
,lude that the "two or three more"
whose names were to numerous to
nention.) Mr.. Wallace and my
'elf had wonderful power over
of an hundred and
.WelYe deleOaIea. W. would iudua