Urbana union. [volume] (Urbana, Ohio) 1862-1872, 1870-09-14
The Keeping of the Public Moneys o.
the State and County.

the State and County
We notice that a committee of the
Chamber of Commerce, consisting o.
VIM. Hooper, Thomas R. Biggs anC
Samuel Davis, jun, have reported in
favor of the alteration of the State law
passed twelve years ago, by which all
depositing of the State or County mon
eys with any parties is forbidden, and
by which it is made a penitentiary of
fense to do otherwise than keep it Sc
curely locked up to await the process
of its distribution through treasury
drafts. The committee favor the bill
/ introduced into the Ohio Senate last
winter, which allows the public mon
/ eys to be deposited with bankers at a
rate of interest not less than four per
cent. premium, upon tho security of Ma
| tiOnal, State or county bonds. at not eX-
! ceeding ninety per cent. of their par val
ue, such bonds to be deposited with the
| Auditor of State. The argument in fa-
vOr of this action is the withdrawal for
quite period of time of so large a sum
of money from the channels of trade
and business. The committee say:
IA few notifications are suggested.
In the State Treasury at Columbus and
in that of Hamilton County there is al
ways a minimum amount of money on
hand At Columbus the cash balance is
seldom below half a million. In our
own Treasury it is not less than $500, 900
or S400, 900 at any time. The amount in
each case might be invested in Govern
ment and Ohio bonds, by which means
both State and County would realize the
highest attainable rate of interest on
such security, and be in possession of
such debentures as would Immediately
command cash in case any emergency
should arise for its use, and the cuTren-
cy now dormant would be set free.u
This is all very well, but is an old argu-
ment, which has cost the people in the
past very dear. The question OfdepOsit-
ing public moneys upon any terms with
banking associations has been found to
be fraught with corruption, and to be
dangerous to the security of the moneys
so deposited. 1t gives to the election of
officer who have moneys at interest a
bad and disturbing element, which is
continued through their whole terms.
The avenues for fraud, no matter how
strongly they are guarded, are in fact
always open under the deposit system.
For safety there is no other plan than
that which has been in successful opera
tiOn in Ohio for many years, and under
which no losses have been sustained
Against the adoption of the substitute
there are other Strong objections. The
public moneys ought not to be farmed
out to any person or persons whatever
to make interest upon. That is not the
object of taxation. If any body is to de-
rive benefit from it, let it be the tax
payers himself. Keep the money in his
hands longer, if you please, rather than
hand itover to the banker for srecUlating
objects. The security of the bonds is not
sufficient. They are liable to large and
sudden fluctuations in the market in
their par value, and buying them even at
ninety per cent. might involve loss to
the counties very considerable in amount
The National Indebtedness is bad enough
but to have it made the basis of our
State and county Indebtedness is still
worse. Who can tell with any certain
ty that the bonds will ever be paid at
all? Public officers should securely keep
the public moneys, and not let them out
to favored friends upon any security
whatever.-Cjn Eng.