Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-02-10

tributed as follows:
Courthouse Bond fund.-. S3,lS5 69
State Fund.-. .................. 7'oz1 81
Common School Fund -. 80. s,lo3 W
HoIa u;I, school Fund.. 26C IS
Virginia School Fund........ l'SSo oS
District Judges Salary Fund. GA W
And the balance. amounting to si4..
07i 0s. as follows:
INDECENT Sick Fund. 2,Ss6 ~
Contingent Fund ........... I4o ~
General Fund. ii'oss VI
That said distribution was so made
because Of the proportions heretofore
established by the County Commission
srs. except certain sums TO certain funds
which could not be touched or interfered
with 10 any manner, the amounts be-
longing to said funds having been'ascer.
tanned; that on the frst Monday in Janu.
AIRY. 1881. he made q statement to the
County Commissioners As required by
law, showing the exact condition oil the
treasury, and at the same time offered to
make the said statement 10 any form de-
sired by the said Commissioners. pro.
yided such statement only embraced his
own transactions a. Treasurer. Hence
he had done all required OF him by law.
and he prayed that the proceedings
against him be dismissed with costs.
On the issue thus Joined the parties
were both ready for q motion for the
perrmptory writ Is filed by the District
Attorney aud Notwithstanding the return
above made.
District Attorney lilies argued that the
return did not raise any issue oil matter
Of fact; that Il did not show that the de-
PENDANT was unable to comply. with the
law and with the alternate writ served
upon him; the return admitted oil the
material allegations OF the petition and
especially that, while acting as Treasurer
Dec. 81, 1880. the said defendant had
not made the quarterly report required
by law Of him. In fact the District At
toruey regarded the said return as q
repetition OF Q stump speech made oy
Mi. McCutchan. Mr.. Kirmsn's Deputy,
before the County Commissioners on
several occasions. and IL was not mate
isll to the points at issue.
The District Attorney argued further
that IL Mr.. Carrick had been In office
| December 81, 1880, be would have been
required to make the desired report and
since the law required 1t Of the Treas.
urer then In Office the defendant Was 10
duty bound to make II unless he could
| show Law which relieved him Of that
duty.
Judge Risiug-I think he has shown
cause Why be cannot be expected to
make such . report. He was 10 once
two months or thereabouis and bad been
directed BY the County Commissioners
not to touch Mr.. Carrick's books or In.
terfere with his accounts, but to open q
new set OF books Of his own, which he
did.
District Attorney Hiles-Still the rec
ords and vouchers were In his Gus
tody -
Mr.. Dsal-That Is expressly denied in
the return. They might have been in
the Treasurer's Office. but MIR. hirman
had received special instructions to have
nothing to do with them.
Judge Rising-Hs was not at liberty
70 interfere Win MT. CaIfiek oooAs -
1t all. I think he did his duty and that
he cannot be compelled to 60 back and
assume any responsibility Of the acts Of
Mr.. Carrick.
District Attorney Hiles-He had In
his Office the records Of bis predecessor.
and be knew how much money there
should have been In the Office and how
much there actually was. He could GER
taiuly. without compromising himself,
have taken sufficient cognizancs Of the
acts Of Mr.. Carrick to have reported to
the Board those facts.
Judge Rising-N he had done 90 he
could only have said heTreasurer's books
showed there should bs 90 much money
there, while In fact there was only what
he found there.
District Attorney Hiles-ws want him
70 do Just that very thing.
Judge Risipg-He can do 90 II he sees
A. but I should not compel an ofhoer.
under the circumstances shown. who
has been In onss only two months, to