The Lake Charles echo. [volume] (Lake Charles, Parish of Calcasieu, La.) 1876-1898, 1883-05-26

/ The constitutional convention of
1879 RENTED all interests, penalties,
costs, fees and charges due the state
Or any political corporation therein,
prior to the first day of January, 1879,
that we're unpaid, provided the taxes
were paid by January, 1881, Having
this fact il view, the senatorial com
mitteo, in their report, take ny the
above named claims, already passed
upon and approved by the board,
and show that some of them are for
fees ckimed by ex-sheriffs~ but which
they are not entitled to. because they
are not included in that class Of fees
and costs RENTED. These ex-sheriffs
had ample time TO collect the taxes, fees
and penalties, and if they had any
claims at all they were prescribed long
before the adoption of tie coEstitu-
tioR of 1879 In regard 30 three Of
tie other claimants the committee
have this TO say
Nj Jumel informs us that his claim
amounting to SO, 1Si was for 29,1Sl certif-
certificates of redemption issued, or to be
issued. Certifc ates OF redemption are issued
only upon the application Of the delinquent.
after paying hi taxes to redeem his prop
erty, and at his cost AS the parties sued
had not paid their taxes there was certainly
no occasion for issuing certificates of red emp
ton, and at that date few, If any, were issu-
ed. The state has nothing TO do with the
collection of this fee, and it was not RENTED
by the constitution. II the auditor had any
claim it was against the taxpayers and not
against the state, and your committee is
therefore unable to lind upon what grounds
this claim OF S29.lS was recognized by the
board. The claim of the Encouragement
allowed for 81, 52S Is was for commissions
on the total amount of judgments obtained
against delinquent taxpayers. His fees are
regulated by law on the amount collected and
paid into the stzEe treasury, and not on the
"
Encouragement was entitled TO remunera-
tion for services actually rendered yet we
think that TO have entitled him To the full
commission allowed, the board should have
required evidence of the sums realized by
the state underthese judgments, and we had
no such evidence. Concerning the validity
Of the other, we are unable TO judge for the
at u. aI.
ton of the documents in the auditors pos
session discloses no iIemized bills and we are
at a loss to know how the board could have
acted intelligently upon the mere statements
presented. Much Of the difficulty seems TO
have bseR obviated, however, by resort to
the certificate plaza scheme Taught with
great danger TO our people, as brilliantly
conserved and successfully executed as in the
days Of Radical supremacy. As to the claims
of Gauthreaux ana others, the records show
that in many cases these fees were from three
to seven times more than the taxes sued for,
and as many as five suits We're entered
against one party when oRs suit would have
been sufficient,
We do not know what mere 10 add
in regard to this matter in eTder tO
throw more light upon it, Every
member of this beard of audit is well
known and never before has there been.
the faintest breath of suspicion against
any Of them. Arc these charges true
or has the committee been laboring
under some terrible delnsion? This
board Of audit knew The committee
was IA existence and would some day
make a report which would be scatter
ed over the country, and yet they have
not endeasored to,ayoia the response
billty Of their acts The committee
eonclnde their report by saying: ''Re-
viewing the foregoing facts wc are
compelled TO subnait that spe haze
never known more reckless expeR6i-
tnre Of pubiie funds or 4 graaier AbHse'
of public Conscience Tie people
arc the iadga and the inty ~ ahia
raalter, and when the testimony is all
Il will doubtless render proper YER
diet NC leave thc case with them