The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1877-02-21

current year against an expenditure Of
$9,373 ~ last year, an increase OF 81
103.77 which is out OF all proportion and
reason.
But says the overseer have'paid for
"repairs" $1,494 40. He has, has he
What business had he to spend the towns
money in this way2 He wa, not elected
for any such purpose, and he had no more
business to expend fifteen hundred dollars
in repairs, than he had in giving free ride
to the legislature OF Vermont. But con-
cedng his right to make these repairs, how
happens it that so soon after the furnishing
and fitting up of the town house 1t became
necessary to expend fifteen hundred dol
lars in "repars ?" The town farm was
purchased considerably less than two years
ago, and the selectmen, in their report of q
year ago, said: 1.-THE buildings have been
"put in thorough repair"-over twenty
Eve hundred dollars had been expended in
additions, improvements, repairs and fur
nishing -"and furnish abundant and COM
Portable quarters for the unfortunate
"poor of the town, as the public will read
{" lily see by an inspection of the premises,
(which they are invited to make" Was
this the truth If not, why did the select
men of year ago attempt 10 deceive the
people? But we have no doubt that they
told the exact truth, and, If 30, what the
necessity of these fifteen hundred dollars
worth of repairs? There is but one answer.
The overseer OF the poor not only exceed
ed his authority, but made useless and ex-
travagant expenditures Of the peoples
money in order to indulge a sort of mania
he has.
He says further that he has expended
| 81, 5S7 so for furniture, bedding and
clothing" Much that we have said rela-
tive to "repairs" will apply to this item.
The town house was well furnished year
ago, but we doubt not some additions were
made thereto, but how much no man can
tell. This item seems to be put in form
for the express purpose of deceiving. The
addition sand clothing" or as it is in the
official report, "clothing, etc.," shows this.
Clothing is no part of the expenses Of fur
nishing the poor house with something
that is to remain. With all due Difference
to our astute critic, and his varied expert
| ence, business men do not, and would not,
consider this clothing" item as "stock IN
trade'-but then they are "shallow" and
superficial" and he alone, always except
ing the overseer, is profound and deep.
OF the item for money expended fol
stock and tools, as with "repairs" ETC., hi
exceeded his powers and expended money
that he was not authorized to. Whether
the money was economically or extrava
gantly expended, we will not stop to in
qulre. 1t is enough to say that it was ex-
pended without authority of law, snd
showed recklessness which i'll becomes &
public officer. If such expenditures are tc
be allowed, all authority might as well b(
vested in the overseer ut once-as, indeed
it is said he and his friends propose to con-
solidate the offices of oversecr of the pool
and first selectman in the person Of the
present overseer.
But he says he has extended S1,0S0.4.
on account of bills contracted by the form
er overseer. Perhaps 30, but how did hi
know the bills were correct2 He pail
them at sight, without inquiry of, or con
sultation with, the overseer that is said t
have contracted them. Is this business
likea Ia this the way a prudent. consci
entious officer discharges his duties? TIL,
overseer, last year, paid $691.94 of bill
contracted by former overseers, and Their
will always be such bills, those for thi
year it is confidently stated, by those hav
ing the best means Of knowing, will amour
to over three thousand dollars.
But however the money has been ex
pended, the fact remains that the expense
of the poor have been somewhere between
sixteen thousand dollars and twenty thous
and dollars-nearer twenty thousand thai
sixteen thousand-and that, upon the over
seer's own statement, at least four THOUSAND
dollars have been expended without au
thority OF law.