The Marion daily mirror. (Marion, Ohio) 1892-1912, 1908-10-24

matter Now that Prospect bridge
case is quite an interesting story
This all happened before the New
mans. bridge was built The c, d.
!, & M. electric railway was consid-
ering the project of building n
branch line from Prospect to Rich
wood. One of the greatest obstacles
was crossing the river at Prospect.
The present county bridge at Pros
pect Is not stropIy enough to carry
an lnterurban car. The interurban
company proposOi TO the county,
that since It needed a good bridge
at Newman's, that II take the bridge
which is at Prospect and place 1t
at Newmans and buy new bridge
for Prospect, one strong enough 10
carry it's cars and the company
would pay two-thirds OF the cost OF
the new bridge. the county to pay
one third. The plan appealed to the
commissioners and they were about
to accept, when in steps Mr.. CLARK
and threatens to secure an injun :
ticn. The upshot of the whole thing
was that the electric line was never
built and Prospect and Marion me-.
chants were deprived of the benz
iit OF the trade which would come
from Mchwood and vicinity. The
county had the opportunity to Sc
cure a new bridge at Prospect and
of having the bridge now at Pros.
pect moved to Newman's for the
cost of making the move and one
third of the cost of the new Pros,
,pect bridge, but Mr. Clark chosa
rather to pay all of the expenses
of new bridge at Newman's. Yet
he says that he saved the county
$4,000 in the deal. Any school boy
knows that the county has lost
money in the deal and In addition
to that has kept the fnterurban
from tapping one of the best sec
tions of the county and one OF the
best towns in an adjoining county.
But the most ridiculous thing OF
his whole letter Is his reference to
his record as criminal prosecutor
Mr. Clark says: "During our one
term in Office we have had sixty
three cuivictions and pleas of gull
ty with only thirteen acquittalsA
and the county has not paid out
one cent to any one to assist us.
Let us glo to thle court records for
few facts concerning this record
which appnrs from Mr. Clark's own
statement to be quite an enwabl,
one. The records show that Mr.
Clark has convicted nine PERSONS.
during his term of office, that twelve
have been acquitted and forty-seven
have entered pleas of guilty In
great number of instances there
have been indictments for grave
crime and the prisoner has been
allowed to plead guilty to a lesser
crime. Whether Mr.. Clark has pro.
posed this or whether the PROPOSE
tion came from the accused can
not be said. Nine convictions and
twelve a1luittals is not such a rec
ord that the average lawyer would
point TO II with pride The average
man would scarcely be willing to
trust his case in court TO the law
yer who loses twelve out of every
twenty-cne case he tries.
The records CT the courts
show that Mr.. Clark during his
term as prosecutor has been floun-
dering around very much like a
hsh out OF water. He claims to be
honest In his efforts, we will not
doubt that for there is no way, of
but we do very seriously
question his judgment The above
statements regarding the cases in
court are proven by the court rec
ords' the statements concerning
matters which are aot In court are
known to so many that It would be
40 difficult thing to prove them.
said Mirror does oppose the
detection of Mr.. Clark and "said
hirror' has herein given good and
reason for that opposition.