Audubon Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Iowa) 1894-1925, 1903-10-01
The Advocates Statements.


We have at different times alluded
to the fact that the Advocate is follow
ing a course of Misrepresentation
toward the county officers and toward
the editor of this paper. In reply to
this the Advocate asks us to point out
where it misrepresents the facts. We
have so far refrained from doing this
for several reasons. One reason is
that the course the Advocate has pur-
sued toward the editor of this paper
has been of such a despicable nature
that we did not care to reply in the
same tone. We did not care to call
opponents names or to become per-
sonal toward the editor of the Advo-
cate. Another reason is that if we
undertook la denial of it's misstate-
ments we would be kept busy at that
unpleasant and Improbable work.
We believe we never before saw a
newspaper SO unreliable in it's state
ments concerning politics. Whether
it is because of ignorance or malice
or both we do not know. We do not
think its editor goes on the theory
that he should verify statement be-
fore making it, but rather that he
will make as rank statement as he
can and look up the facts afterwards
if necessary.
AT present we shall call attention to
but one or two things. The Advocate
has frequently charged that taxes
have been increasing in the county
right along and that the county Off
GERS are responsible. From the nature
of some of his statements along this
line it may reasonably be inferred
that the editor of the Advocate is in
ignorance of the fact that more than
half our taxes are of such character
that county officials have no power
over them except to receive and re-
ceipt for them and turn them over to
the proper authorities. We refer to
the state, township road, town, town
bond, school and other funds levied
by state, town, township and school
district boards respectively. County
officers have no authority over them.
Just last week the Advocate said "Our
school houses are built. Our county
bridges are built and we are making
no public improvements. Where does
our taxes go?" We are under the
impression that improvements are be-
ing made almost every year to some
of our school houses. When new
one is built it's cost is often strung
out for a series of years. Audubon is
building a $4,000 school building
this year and it will not all be paid
for this year or next. To say no
bridges are built nowadays here is in
like strain of untruth.
AS to purely county taxes the several
county levies of county. county school,
bridge, insane, poor, county road,
bridge bond and soldiers relief con-
stitute levy this year of 12.4 mills
which is at least one mill lower than
the average for all these county funds
for the past ten years. Besides that
the county is nearer out of debt now
than it was several years ago. The
bridge bond debt was 800, 900 and the
interest has not only been kept up but
the principal has been reduced to
$ll,0 900. The county fund was much
behind but it is now nearly paid out.
The county board who manages these
matters are good and conservative
men and their conduct of county af-
fairs will bear the closest investiga-
ton.
We at present call attention to but
one other misstatement and that is
"The board doubled Sheriff Ander-
sons salary over ex-Sheritf Jones'
before the law fixed the sheriff's sal
airy at S1,S00.O0." We find by ex-
aiming the records that Jones was
given four hundred dollars and the
ices Ol his OIllCe III 1880 WHICH was
his first year, and the same in 1897.
He then sued the county for deputy
hire amounting to SS90.2S more,
and won. The last two years he got
$4,000 year and fees. Mr.. Ander-
son received $4,000 and fees the first
year, 100000 and fees the second year
and $4,000 and fees the third year,
paying his own deputy each
year. Since the new law went into
effect he gets 1900, paying his own
deputy and tn rning his fees into the
county. During Jones' time the fees
were heavier than during Anderson's
time, there being more big
trials. If the Advocate had not wished
to mislead it would not have said
Anderson's salary was double Jones'
as it gave wrong impression. A
wrong impression purposely made to
deceive is as bad as willfull misstate-
ment. ...