Jasper County Democrat, Volume 1, Number 16, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 30 July 1898 — Democratic State Ticket. [ARTICLE]

Democratic State Ticket.

For Secretary of State. SAMUEL RALSTON, of Boone County. For Auditor of State, JOHN W. MINOR, of Boone County, For Treasurer of State, HUGH DOUGHERTY, of Wells County, For Attorney General, JOHN G. M'NUTT, of Vigo County. For Clerk of Supreme Court, HENRY WARRUM, of Marion County. For Superintendent Public Instruction, W. B. SINCLAIR, of Starke County. For State Statistician, JAMES S. GUTHRIE, of Brown County. For State Geologist. EDWARD BARRETT, of Hendricks County. For Judges Supreme Court. 2d District, LEONARD J. HACKNEY, of Shelby County. Third District. JAMES M'CABE, of Warren County. Fifth District, TIMOTHY E. HOWARD, of St. Joseph County. For Judges of Appellate Court. First District, EDWIN TAYLOR, of Vanderburgh County. Second District, C. J. KOLLMEYER, <>f Third District, EDGAR A. BROWN, of Marion County. Fourth District, WILLIAM S. DIVEN, of Madison County. Fifth District, JOHANNES KOPELKE. of Lake County. For Congress. JOHN ROSS, ot Tippecanoe County. For Representative. DAVID H. YEOMAN, of Jasper County. Prosecuting Attorney, HOtli Judicial District, IRA W. YEOMAN. The County Ticket. For County Clerk, JOHN F. MAJOR, of Carpenter Tp. For County Auditor. GEORGE O. STEMBEL, of Wheatfield Tp. For County Treasurer, MARION I. ADAMS, of Marion Tp, For County Sheriff, WILLIAM C. HUSTON, of Milroy Tp. For County Surveyor. DAVID E. GARRIOT, of Union Tp. For County Coroner. DR. P. J. POTHUISJE. of Carpenter Tp. Commissioner Ist District, FRANK M. HERSHMAN, of Walker Tp. Commissioner 2nd District, LUCIUS STRONG, of Rensselaer.

The cost of wiring, and putting electric light fixtures in the new court house was over S3,(XX). Hon. F. M. Griffith was renominated for congress by the democrats of the Fourth district at Columbus, Thursday, by acclamation. If the republicans wish to be honest with the people of the county, why don’t they give out an honest statement of the cost of the new court house? When an attorney wishes to have a case come to trial in which he is interested, he pushes the thing along. When he dosen’t intend it shall ever be tried he has it continued for a few times and it is finally dropped. Isn’t it so, Mr. Chizum? Mr. Crumpacker, on his return from Washington—“ Hooray!” Hawaii is oure! Constituent—“ But you were wholly opposed to that measure,” Mr. C. —“No sir, I decline to be misrepresented. I decline to have my sentiments misunderstood by posterity. Why, you’ve no idea of the will power it required to keep me from coming over long ago.” Friend Abe we fear you are too late to discern any defects in that •curt house yard coping. The rough and broken ends and joints toerw fitted up with cement and Smoothed over the first of the week, and now such an innocent as yourself would never know but what it was the real stone. Of •nurse this cement will soon become loose and work out, but not until the work has been accepted and paid for.

Our republican friends tell us that the farmers of Jasper county are prosperous, and will not feel the tax on that $175,000 court house. This hardly confirms the record in the sheriff's office, which shows that from Aug. 20. ’97 to date there have been 46 sheriff’s sales in the county.

At the March special session of the board of commissioners, as published in the Republican, §745.33 was allowed for work on court house, in addition to §2,211 on electric light fixtures. Of this amount §80.25 is stated to be for “cleaning court house,” and §4OO to the Conant Furnittire Co., for “labor etc.” At the April session §328.35 was allo wed on court house, and at the June session §148.50 was allowed for same. Of this amount nearly every dollar is in the nature of extras. We believe it is safe to say that the entire cost of the buildihg as it now stands, including grading, walks and coping for yard, will exceed §175,000, notwithstanding an “official statement” lately published that the entire cost would not exceed §154,000. Thousands of dollars have been paid out which were not included in the aforesaid statement.

The “official statement” of the cost of the new court house was given out about June 22. and purported to contain every item of cost except clock and bell, per diem of Commissioners, etc., and cement walks, etc., for the yard, yet in the face of this statement, at the March session, §4OO was allowed the Conant Furniture Co., for "labor, etc.,” §l4O to A. T. Perkins for “work on court house,” and §80.25'" for “cleaning court house.” Not one dollar of the above is included in the “official statement” of June 22, although it all belongs to the item of cost of the building. At the April, May and June sessions several hundred dollars more was allowed for extras and work upon the building, but never a dollar of it appears in the “official statement.” The peoof Jasper county will do well to pay no attention to “official statements” of county matters emanating from republican sources.

We were informed that the county commissioners had instructed the county attorney to begin suit against the petitioners in the Waukarusha and Iroquois ditches to recover costs made therein, alleged to be due the county, and so stated in our issue of last week. An examination of the commissioners’ record, however, reveals the fact that last November the Board contracted with a firm of attorneys in Rensselaer to pay them S7OO commission for the collection of this money, $350 in each case. This is but another illustration of the incompetency of the Board. Either the county is entitled to recover from the petitioners or it is not. If not a claim in which the county is entitled to recover, why—unless for political thunder—make the attempt? If the petitioners are liable, why was not a fee bill issued and the full amount collected at once, instead of waiting several years and then donating S7OO of the amount to the lawyers to collect it? If Jasper county is entitled to any part of this money she is entitled to every dollar of it, and the proper way to have gone about its collection was to have issued a fee bill.

In 1894 Hazen S. Pingree, at that time mayor of Detroit, now Governor of the State of Michigan, conceived the potato patch plan as a means of relieving the awful strain placed on his city by the great numbers of the poor and unemployed. The first statement of Mr. Pingree’s plan to his townspeople called forth nothing but derisive opposition. He was firm in the conviction of its worth, however, and when counoilmanio support failed him, organized a private association, relying on subscriptions for the funds and on the gratuitous offers of ground for cultivation. The success of the system in that first year in Detroit

was immense, for 430 acres of land were cultivated among97s families; the expense was $3,600, and the value of the total product from the “farms” $14,000. The showing was so very satisfactory that the following year the city assumed the management of the plan as a municipal charity, and has retained it ever since. In 1897 Detroit reported that she had in this manner assisted 1,563 families, an increase not far short of 100 per cent, in the four years. In 1897 the system was also in active operation in thirteen other cities, namely, Boston, Brooklyn, Buffalo, Chicago, Dayton, Denver, Kansas City, Minneapolis, New York, Omaha, Philadelphia, Reading, Seattle, Toledo and Providence. These cities, including Detroit, cultivated 3,000 acres of land and relieved some 5,500 families. The 1898 spread is still much wider.