"still Another."

EiiiTOB Acoug : - lu the issue ot the ('otcrier of March 1-), my iittention was called to a commuuicatiou uiuler the above liead, sined Conrad Krapf, which he sends forth iti auswer to a series ot' queatious propounded to him by me in the issue of the 8th iust. It is, to say the lenst of it, rather an limusina etTort to serve up a dish ot hash, badly tuixed and sour ut thtit. Uut as usual there is a persistent determiiiation ou tlie part of its niithor to evade a truthful planatiou of the iiuestions which I then propounded. Ile opeus up his case, haviuL nu doubt in view a taiut idea of future rewar.is and punishtneutb, and he asks me it I am the ' keeper ot his conscienoe." Iu reply, 1 would say that if that niystieal ohject were or could be conh'ded to my keeping it would not rehuiré uiuch of a piiorifice ot time on my part to care tor it, na he is the possessor of rather a snmll shaie of it, as I shall endeavur to bhow hereafter. He says I dul certity to my bilí, that it wou sorrect, and that the labor was performed and it was honest and true. Yes, Mr. Knipt, this bill is very cloaely related to those honest, legal and just bilis which it has been your custom to present in the past, a iew of which wcre presented for allowauce to the superintendants of the poor, and which they conspired to detraud you out of by rejectiug them. But this man Krapf says that if 1 know anything about the t.ix rolls I ouht to know that the wolk ia estimated by the nuoiberof exteusiuiia that the roll coutaius, and lie again submits a mathematical calculatiou on extensions, and he shows beyond all peradventure that he is entitled to not ouly the $292. 00, as claimed and recetved by him, but to $33.9ti additional ; but that sensitivo, honest conscience of hls iooms up to upbraid him and he declines to accept, tor the reasou that we are satisfied with the pay. Yes, we, Conrad Krapf, " are satistied with the pay." And just here Mr. Editor, litsin.it me to subject the bill of this man Krapf, as well as the uieaus he adopted to secure his pay on it, to a slight analysis and compare it with the law goveruing him, which hú ou entering on the duties of supervisor, had sworii to observe and obey, and peronit this man Courad Krapf, to see himself as others see him. By retereuce to the coinpiled lawa of 1871. pae 372, I find that he is entitled to $2 per day tor eiich day actualiy and necessarüy spent in asaessing property, copying the tax roll, extendiiig the taxes, and perfectiug the Simio. He makes a bill of 14Ü days, at f2 per day which in the aggregate amouuts to $92 ; attaches to it his official certifícate, which is vjrtuallv tiis outh. and draws his pav on it. And iti, he answers cnus : iou ought to know that the wolk is estimiited by the uumber ot extensioiis that-the roll coutains " ; the First aud Secoui! ward roll contains Viói extensions aud he Baya please divide this bill of mine, Í292, by the 1 :4 uxtcnsions and tile result will be 21.5 cents pur extensión. This, it wil be conceded is a virtual admission on the part of Courad Krapf that this bill of Ï292 of hls, was mude up on the basis of 21. ó cents tor each exteusion on his roll. I dety Conrad Krapf to poiut out the law that will justity him ju makiuj such a bill. Yet he modestly asks me to pleitse be honest and give him his just deserts. I have uo husitatiou in sayiug that it Courad Krapf hnd his just desertj in this case iiewill be retirad to the obscurity of private hfe by the voters of the First and Second wards. Let us admit for the sake ot furtUer analysis that the system of extensión!) is correct, aud what do we ñud ? Take the bill ou which he, Krapf, collectcd his pay on from the city, say 146 days, and divide Voi extensious by it aud the n-Milin shows that he managed to make about unie exteusious a day by workiug nighta aud Suudays, for which he claimed and received as pay Í2 per day. Aud all this is done to satisiy that houest, seusitive and iinmaculate couscieuce of his. Xuw, Conrad, I say arisi! and seo yourselt as others see you, as well as this honest, reanouable, aud lawlul bill of yours. Aud next he presents that conundruui, the "wuod contract." The wood hesays was bought of the Auu Arbor Schutzenbuud, and it was delivered to the poor at Í4.ÓÜ per cord. Now, Krapf, why not teil the tax payen ot this city nd county what you paid for that wood r Why uot teil them, as vou did me at the time oi the purchuse, that you were to pay $3 per cord for it wlien sold 't Aucl why not teil the truth that you told that wood at $4.50 per load and uot per cord, aud that eoch load eariied tor you 25 cents for the order, maltin the wood cost the couuty $4.75 per load of aboot 3-4 of a cord, and at the rate of nearly $6 per cord 'Í And tlns was all done by you with uno eye pointed towanls the widow and the orphan ot the First and Second wards, and the otlier on Conrad Krapf's pocket and that sonsative couscience of yours. But Krapf says that this was county wood, and I was led to believe that it was such, trom the fact that I fiud au order of Conrad Krapf on our files at the County House, issued to one Heury Bryther for tive days work, at seventy-five cents per day, makmg B.75 and 25 ceuta tor the order, for sawmtf this cúuuty wood luto stove wood. The order to which 1 referís Su. 55, dated. December 23, 1874, and signed Courad Krapf, supervisor Now is it not fair to presume that if the couuty pau) for sawing this wood that tue pronta arising froni its sale should find lts way into the couuty tieasury? Hhs such been the case 'i Not a mili ot it ever tound its way there ; and if tliis was the private purchase of Cünrail Krapf, the what nght has he to issue his order on the county treasury to pay for sawing his wood. Mr. Krapf will you please ri96 aud expLiiu 't Do uot dodge this as you have all the other questious which I propouuded you. "But the report of the superintendente in 1875-b' are uot correct," he, Krapp, bas not exptiiided the amouuts which our reports charge him with iu thoso years- particularly in 1876. He mly speut iu that year Í82.2Ó, anti our reports charge him as having expeuded #189 57. ïu reply, I would say that our reports ot those years are striotly correct. This man Krapf doubtless is aware that, during those years, his poor orders were as numerous as üies m summer. Uur reports do not state whut year those orders Dl his were issued, but wo report ou the amouiit of his orders which were presented aud allowed by us, up to aud íncludiiig the close of our fiscal year. And as to those questious which he says he has been repeHtO'ily askbd to answer, to wit, who pent thu f 114.33 't as he could not auswer, 1 will answer for him, aud take my answer trom the records. Courad Krapf speut it. It matters uot to us in what years your order were issued - thuy were nevertheless preseuted to our board for allowance, oud were tllowed as show n in our report. l'urliaps the deficit in the accounts ol the supervisor arise from the tact that quite au amouiit of temporary relief had been f urniahed by hun to a number of widows iu the First aua öecoiid wards where no applicatiou htul been made on thelr part to the supervisor. I will here 8tate that iu 1873-4 1 was appoiuied by the suporiutendents of the poor to examine and report to tliem the uumber and couditiou of the parties who were theu receiviug aid trom Mr. Krapt, and the result of lht examination is yet fresh in my raemory. Suffice it to aay thut the proUigious oxpenditure of the yeoples raouey wal to a certain extent, and for a time, restmmed in those wards. iiut the result 8howed tliat at the close of the year an expenditure ot about $1,300 to $1,400 was showu by reporta ot the suuerinteudeuts to havo beeu disburaed by him in the First aud Secuiid warüs of this oity. And next, Mr. EUitor, Supervisor Krapf Bres off his pop-guu aud asks me to oxplain how much " old rye " 1 aold the Poor House iu 1873. In reply, I wotild wiy that my bit In on tilo at the Gounty House, anti ot wtiíoh I court invt.:stg;it ion, show tii.it I fuinished two gallons of u rye " ut $2 per gallon, which was chargeable to the connty in that year ; and i h.it ws furnished by directions ot tho county physician tor coiiipouiidinjí purposi-?,, and the same was approved by the superintmidents. I woutd also s iy that those goods have been atid are to-day furnished by other partios, wlici] dtrected liy the samo authority, and for tho purpone. 'l'be balance, as Hliown by my hills ot that yc.nr, vv.is fomiehed for the use of a pay boardur named Fian cis IXmgharty, who wai placed there by hls uariian, Mr. P. Tuomy. The county phymciaii having directed it m his case, hiu "ii.irliiui, Mr. Tuomy, (Üreoted the keeper to lui nish tlüa niau (Douglierty) with the rat i on ot tliat article prescribed by the ounty phyuician and charle tlie saine to hiin, wlnch the keeper diti, and Mr. P. Tuomy pul Uie bill, which I proaume he had a right to do. The " ox cart," to which reterence is madeT was puruhased br thucount)' (rom B. W.Waite, and was conAtdereci then worth thjp priue [aiJ. If one can be purchased DOW tor halt tlm amount, uo doubt Krapf witl speculate, proTidod he has the change, as EÏ8 record witli reference to wood contracta shows that he i at alt tiraos open for a bnrpinn. So niiicli, Mr. Editor, for tliis babllo about "oíd rye " and " ox carts." And with a further request to brin on my " conuudrums," which to my tnind wonld be tnli ■, as be hus failed so tar to explain onet he ríhb himselt my esteenaed friend, Conrad Krnpf, whom he saya T cali O. D," I am not aware, Mr. Editor, that 1 have conferred any degree on the i?e"tlernan, umi thit to me ia surely a "conuudrum." hii-li, it' cal led upon to dtiiine, I should detiue as meaning ( i.i Doxkiïy. I am led to the deKnition trom the peculiar btaying of the animal a exhibited in the article that calla for this ieply ; but all things conideredt 1 shuil amend this deünition by adding to hi 1 conuudrum " the letter B, and submit it for your consideratiou in the hinguage of tho Hou. Bardwell Sloat, as O. D. B. Edwakd Duffy. Aun Arbor, March 19, 1878.