The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1881-05-26
CHARLEY DEITERs ACCOUNTS.

county, and since that time has been
apziously awaiting the event OF q succeed
ing report from this board, and when the
Finance Committee met in the Commits.
sIouer's room at the Court House yester'
day morning they found the room very
full OF people anxious to know the result
OF the investigation. The following mem.
bers Of the Committee were present;
Messrs. Caldwell, chairman; Canadian,
Atkinson, TsrFill, Armstrong ind Speldel.
Prosecuting Attorney jordan and Mr.. w.
P. Hubbard appeared for the Board, and
Messrs. CrRcrait and Ferguson for Mr..
DeiteTs.
Samuel Matthews, one Of the Exsmin.
ing Committee, by invitation, then read
reports OF the progress, which are as fol-
lows,
WHEELING, W, Va, April 81, 1881.
To The Committee on Finance and Accounts,
Board Of Commissioners ef Ohio County,
Wea Virginia:
GENTLEMRN:-We have concluded our
examination Of the order books for 1881
and 1880, and have made q partial exam.
inRtion Of the order books for 1879 and
1878,
In comparing the payments made to
road contractors, with the vouchers for
such payments as given by the County
Engineer, we find that oVerpaymenta have
been made upon contracts as follows, viz;
VIM. Carey, under q contract dated
April IA. 1900, has been paid, exclusive oil
the discount on the Commissioners war
rants, 1888 10, when by the final estimate
OF the County Engineer Tor all work done,
he should only have received S45S %,
showing that an o%verpayment has been
made to him OF $40 90. :
George Arkle, under q contract dated
April so, 1880, has been paid, exclusive Of
The discount on the Commissioners war
rants, 81, 1893 SO, when by the final estimate
OF the County Engineer for all the work
done he should only have received
Sl,l40 81, showing an o%verpayment oil
$57 02 to him.
Themas Scott, under q contract dated
- 1880, for work done on the In
Urinary and Big Wheeling Road, has been
paid, exclusive OF the discount on Com.
missioners' warrants, $32254 when by the
final estimate OF the County Engineer for
all the work done he should only have re-
Ceived $2SS 46, showing an overpayment
OF S34 03 to him,
Adolph Yoke, under q contract dated
September II, 1878, for work on the
Peninsula road, has been paid, exClu.
| H. - Nko liann1,nk nm 0haI nnN m InniOnnFal
warrants, $2,0S6.02, when by the final es!i
mate oil the County Engineer he should
only have received $2,O56S2, showing an
%oyerpayment Of $50,
Adolph Yoke, under another contract
dated May 7, 1878, for work on a bridge on
the Ohio road, has been paid, exclusive Of
the discount on the Commissioner war.
rants, $474 90, when by the final estimate
OF the County Engineer Tor all the work
done he should only have received 1903 20,
showing an overpayment oil Sl66.4O TO
him.
We will say that, upon q close examina.
ton OF this last overpsyment, your com.
mittee will find that the first estimate oil
the County Engineer, 1854, dated August
30, 1875, was settled In full by the pay.
ment to August 0herman Of commission.
ers' warrant No. 40, dated August 20,
1878, for 1857 80, aud the last estimate
dated as above is reCeipted by Adolph
YaCke as having been paid In full August
90, 1873. But o month after the work was
oil finished and the last estimate settled 10
full, q commissioners warrant, No. 2G6,
dated September 80, 1878, was issued,
payable 10 Charles Ii. Deiters for Adolph
YaCke or order for $3.50 40, and charged
to the same account. We find no order OF
the Board allowing the payment Of this, to
Adolph YaCke, nor do we find any receipt
or receipted bill showing the payment u
this amount 10 Adolph Yaeke. The
County Engineer, W. O. Smith, says he
gave ne estimate to YaCke for the pay.
ment Of any sum TO him on account OF the
River road, after the n furnished
August 20, 1878. The commissioners
warrant has been paid by the Sheriff ana
returned by him 10 the Board along with
other commissioner warrants, and we
submit 1t herewith for your inspection.
Elections are generally very expensive,
but We find from the way the Bostd Of
Commissioners have been paying election
bills, as presented 10 them, the Board
makes them more costly than the law con.
templated they should be; for instance,
the county paid as election expenses In
October and November, 1850, the sum Of
l,430 90; and II the bills had been proper.
ly examined and paid according to the
election law Of the State, the amount
would not have exceeded $40 O5, there.
by showing that the county paid 1857 25
more than the proper amount to the Off.
GERS and clerks conducting the elections.
We find that one merchant has been
paid the same bill twice. The amount is
81 50, having been paid in April, 1879,
and again In May, 1879. We filed q bill
with the proper court sgcinst the said
merchant, 80 that II will probably be de.
Quoted from his next bill against the
county.
Phe Sheriff in order 10 get proper
credit on his account for the amount paid
by him for the county, presents the Com.
missioner's warrants and an itemized
statement OF the amount oil such warrants
and the interest paid upon them. The In.
terest statement Is made up from pencil
memorandums made upon the warrants
by the Sheriff and his deputies. We would
suggest that a different method for the
payment Of interest be adopted by your
COMMITTEES. Under the present method,
one that has prevailed for years past, the
county has no proper check upon the
payment Of interest. Through some mis-.
take or otherwise the county may often
have been compelled to pay interest when
It should not be charged mitch less paid.
We have fully explained TO your commit.
teee the reasons for this suggestion.
We wish to call your attention 10 the
following;
"All fines which accrue 10 the State as.
sessed by Justices must be Immediately
paid TO the Sheriff Of the county. The
Sheriff shall enter the suins as paid 10 him
to the credit OF an account 10 be kept by
him nbiIpr iha hpaIinu nj IJannfaI gchnSI