Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-01-18
TO PAY OR NOT TO PAY.

TO PAY OR NOT TO PAY.
Hearing of Arguments on the Petition for
Writ of Mandamus Against Treasurer
Auditors Warrants Taken Under Adj
visement by the Court,
The case of the State ca rel. Horace E.
Horton & Co. against County Treasurer Fl.
M. Rice came before Judge Simons yester-
day forenoon, on motion for a peremptory
writ of mandamus to show cause why the
treasurer should not honor the auditors
warrant for $22,15O. drawn on the Fort
Smelling bridge fund. Mr.. Gilman ap-
peared for County Treasurer Rice, and
Mr.. c. d. O'Brien represented the
interests of the contractors and commission.
Mr.. Gilman addressed the court with ref
erence to the facts at issue, adverting to the
writ, which he described rs containing moth
ing that tended to show the presentation of
anything but the naked warrant. The war
rant had been presented in three separate
upon its previous allowance by the commits
by the original order.
Counsel adverted to the presentation of
the three alleged warrants and proceeded to
read the answer to the writ, an account of
which appeared in Yesterdays issue of the
GLOBE.
Counsel was here interrupted by Mr..
O'Brien, who expressed desire to offer a
demurrer to the return, which was granted.
Mr. csilpoar, continual hx,r 10 %bo
general statutes bearing upon the payment
of funds under the jurisdiction of the COM
| mission, the modus operandi of which has
been previously described in this paper.
The special laws O.. 1873 were quoted,
which provide that ali contracts made by the
commission must be certified to by major
ity of the board and the chairman, after
which they are passed to the auditor, who is
authorized to issue warrant for the pay
ment of the clam. The commission allowed
the claim and not the warrant, which merely
authorized the payment of the claim, and
the treasurer was not justified in disbursing
the fund on the presentation of the naked
warrant.
The treasurer had given bond for $780,
600 to insure the safe custody of the funds,
and he was bound to take every precaution
W H1otCSe Ath11oCll lIOuI CuucCco5dIy Il5h6s
The public interests demanded that such
should be the case, and any doubts wonld be
resolved in favor of the custodian of the
peoples money. 1t was necessary that every
safeguard should be employed to protect
sumption was that when he paid the
money the order upon which it had
been issued should be taken up.
no irc,p H.
the claim, he had no evidence, save the
been presented. Had the parties shown
their hand to Mr.. Rice the same as they have
done in court, the matter would have been
amicably adjusted. The court should insist
upon ample protection to those who have
charge of the public funds, snd as personal
entry would not be held sufficient, in the
event of Irregularities, the voucher or claim
should be insisted upon invariably.
Mr.. O'Brien followed in behalf Of Horton
& Co. and the bridge commissioners, and
promised his remarks by moving for per-
emptory writ of mandamus on the return.
After adverting briefly to the history of the
case, with which the public are familiar,
counsel referred to the embarrassing and
unjust position in which the contractors
were placed, who were spoken of as knock
ing at the doors of the treasury, dem andipg
their pay for work that had been faithfully
executed. The law strictly required that the
claim, IS certified to by the commissioner,
should be filed With the auditor, as there was
no provision in thu statute making it obi
gatory for him to pass the voucher to the
county treasurer.
The contractors came as private individu-
Z e.. LII
rial which had been completed in accordance
with the contract OF the 9Th inst. They pre-
| sented q just evidence of debt, to be paid
from a fund especially provided for by the
legislature, and because the commission and
treasurer could not agree on the mode OF
procedure, they were forced to wait for their
money. They stood between en- upper ard
neither mill stone, anxiously awaiting the
payment of the estimate. Counsel alluded
to the return, which he characterized IS con-
tanning no issue. The superstructure of the
bridge had been practically finished On the
9th inst, the work was approved by the en-
gineer, the claim allowed by the commission
aud the warrant issued by the auditor, the
correctness of which had all been admitted.
All the ana!ogies which might have existed
as tending to show faint or fraud were alb
| SENT. II tueIS ua1 DSeI presumption OF
! fraud the writ would not have been asked
for. In the absence of any suspicion of
| fraud the treasurer was not warranted in pre-
Stunning to set himself up az the judge of
brother officials. TIE treasurer was simply
banker: the auditing power is an entirely
different function, and there was no Instance
on record where the mere paymaster had
any authority to pass upon the validity of
claims. Were this responsibility made a
part of his duties, no honest man could be
found to accept the position.
Counsel read from the general statutes
bearing upon the relative duties of the
treasurer and auditor, upon the interpreta-
ton of which he adduced the statement that
in the payment of funds upon the certified
warrant by the auditor the treasurer was not
permitted to exercise the slightest discre-
ton. The auditor and commission had car
ried out the full provisions of the law, and in
SO doing bad reached the end of the rope,
and there was no redress except by writ of
mandamus.
The power of the commission was advert
ed to by counsel, who described their rights