Democratic Sentinel, Volume 6, Number 40, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 3 November 1882 — MR. NOWELS’ VINDICATION [ARTICLE]

MR. NOWELS’ VINDICATION

Editor Democratic Sentinel : In the Republican of October 2f.th, 1882, appears an article written bv some unknown quantity, in which they make the attempt to damage me personally by making assertions that are false in every particular, and cannot be supported by anything like a shadow of truth. First they gay: “What proof, for instance,of pecu'liar efficiency,” is found in the fact that through the failure of the auditor to post certain nonces required by law, the first jail contract was invali dated thereby entailing, directly or indirectly a loss of something like a thousand dollars to the county, bedsides depriving the county of the use of the jail for many months? - ’ Now it was no part of the worn of the auditor to post those notices until it wag ordered by the Board of Commissionersand spread of Record. (See Acts 1875, page 36; Revised Statutes 1876, page 375; also Revised Statutes 1881, page 910); and the section reads the same In all cases and is as follows: “When it shall become necessary for any Board of County Commis sioaers of any County in this State, to contract for any Court-House, Jail or other County or Township building or monument, and plans and specifications have been adopted and deposited in the office of the Auditor of such County and open to public inspection, the said Board shall not contract for or let the building of the same unil it lias advertised such letting and requested bids for the same for at least six weeks, in at least one newspaper of general circulation in such county, it any is printed therein, and by postiner up notices of such building, with tne time, plan, place and terms ot the same, with a refer > nce to such plans and specifications. Provided, that the provisions of this act shall not apply to buildings when tae cost of the same shallMiot exceed five hundred dollars.”

And at that time, Hon. R. S. Dw’igains, County Attorney, toldjthe Board, when he w T as called and the matter submitted to him for his opinion, that it was no part of my duty, but that of the Commissioners’ only. And as to the cost of advertising, I will say: That such exaggerations should cause the tongue of tho foul slanderer to cleave to the roof of his mouth never to be used again. I will now give the exact cost of readvertising the j«il : Marshall & Overacker, No. of claim 3716, amount of claim, $25 00; No. of order drawn, 2150. James W. McEw en, No. of claim 3725; amount of claim $24 00; No. of order drawn, 2210, mak‘ ng a total to re-advertise of $49 00. Second: “What proof, for instance, of peculiar efficiency is found in the fact that through the failure es the auditor to call together the members of the County Board of Equalization at the proper time there Has been no session of the Board this year thereby inflicting injustice upon many whose taxes are too heavy and endangering the legality of the entire tax levy of .he county for this year?” The Board of Equalization was called to meet on the first Monday of Jnne, and Messrs. James Yeoman, Alexander A. Tyler, Thomas H. Rob inson and David Gray, met in accord ance with such notice effi the day required and the Board of Commission - ers being in session as directed by law, any one can plainly see that it was no fault of mine that the property of the county was not equalized. The Board doubtless had excellent reasons for the a ction it took. Third:

“What proof of efficiency can be found in the selling of a certain piece of school land to two different men, and then borrowing the school fund from the treasurer so closely that when purchaser number two applied for a return of his money the treasurer was oblidged to repay him from entirely different funds.” As to the sale of school land I will say that one certificate was issued to one Charles W. Lowman for the n| sw 16, 28. 6, and by mistake was not put on the transfer book, and afterwards one forty was sold to I. J. Porter. and certificate issued, but when the mistake was discovered we paid him back his purchase money, interest, and cost of certificate; and as to the overdraw of the fund I cannot say, but do knew that at this time the fund has a balance on hand as any one can see by examining my ledger. Fourth. “How for instance about a certain fifty dollar check on the Citizens Bank, drawn in favor of A. G. W. Farmer of Jordon township, which was indorsed by the latter and Daid at Goodland, and from there passed in the course of business through a bank at Lafayette, then through McCoy & Thompson’s bank here, and finally to the Citizens bank?” A check was given by me to A. |G* W. Farmer, of Jordan township for money owing by me to him in a legitimate business transaction, and not to corrupt any person for bis vote. That a bans of deposit should resort to giving a man’s private business to outsiders that they may drag them Into politics, is a breach of faith and should be denounced, Fifth. “How about another’ fifty dollar check which went to Newton township, and beipg returned was replaced by the ready cash?” This statement and insinuation is as false as false can be. No check was given and RETURNED, and replaced by the ready cash, Sixth. “How about those negotiations in regard to the lowes; cash price of Gillam township?” I nevei have, nor do I ever expect to make any such negotiations for the purposes implied in this unmanly paragraph. Seventh, “How about that saloon keeper whose influence a great, temperance advocate expected to secure because a rebate of five dollars was made on the fees of the auditor for issuing his license?” As to a rebate of five dollars I demand that Mr. unknown quantity produce his authority for the assertion or to forever keep his peace. As to my temperance proclivities, I am

a temperance man by nature, educa- 1 'tion and practice, and if this is to be an argument used to defeat me in ’ this campaign I will have to confess that politics are indeed corrupt. Eighth. “As to that large brood of foul slanders t at are being circulated against Mr. Robinson’s character, both public and private, we can only say that while we hope that Mr. Nowels is not the author of any of them, he at least must know that they are being used in bls interest, a >d that he could put a stop to their circulation if he choose to do so.”j I have never said one word derogatory to Mr. Robinson’s character, ei ther in public or private, and I trus*” that I may never so far forget the i example and teachings of mv parents , as to engage in such practices. I ] stand before the people ns an honest, I honorable man, and if I should be ; elected to the office of Auditor I wili in the future, as in the past, endeavor to serve the people faithfully Impartially and to the best of my ability. Trusting that the people will examine into the truth or falsity of the article in the Repbblieah, and this the answer, £ am as ever, Yours, Obediently, EZRA C. NOWELS. The “Lordy” element of the Republican party during the week have been busily engaged in circulating a circular purporting to give the testi. mony’ of M.F. Chilcote, in the caus e of Halloran vs McCullough, Kessler and Hoover, for refusing him livens to sell intoxicating liquors. The cir culars were being caiefully placed whore they were expected to do the most good, and every effort made to conceal the movement from Democrats. But the trick was discovered, and the nice little game is blocked, to the extreme chagrine of the “buss’ ,es” and Halloran, Read the follow' ng: State of Indiana, ) . County of Jasper, ( s ’ George Kessler, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he was a member of the Board of Commissioners of said County in December, 1875. and that he well remembers the fact that Michael Halloran was an applicant for a License to sell intoxicating liquors at retail, and that M. F. Chilcote was of Halloran’s counsel and interested in his success, and that the decisk of the Board was adverse to Halloran application; and afterwards Halioi commenced an action for damages against Samuel McCullough, George Kessler, anti Frederick Hoover, they being then Commissioners; that said case was tried in the Newton Circuit Court, at the October Term, 1876; affiant further says that he has read a circular which purports to give the testimony of M. F. Chilcote, on the trial of said cause, and he knows, of his own personal knowledge, that the part of said Chilcote’s testimony which says that affiant George Kessler stated that “Healey’s damned Catholic Irishman could not get license,” or words of l>ke import, is unqualifiedly false in every particular; affiant further states that he never at any time while he was a Commissioner, made use of any words or language that could be construed in the way indicated in Chilcote’s testimony; affiant further states that during the pendency of Halloran’s petition, he and Frederick Hoover, then one of the Commissioners, had frequent consul'ations on the subject of granting the license, and ha knows that said Hoover never referred to said Hallor an as a Catholic Irishman, nor never expressed himself as opposed to granting Halloran’s license for any other than legal reasons; but affiant swears that Mr. Halloran had the same consideration and treatment by the Board of Commis.-ioneis, and by each member of the Board, that any other citizen of the State would have received. GEORGE KESSLER. Subscribed md sworn to ifMggfc before me this second day of USfiP November, a. d. 1882. CHARLES H. PRICE, Clerk Jasper Circuit Court