Arizona weekly citizen., 1885-08-22
NOTES
On ExPerI Drake's Statement of the Fl.
 naEcial Condition of PIlna County.

On ExPerI Drake's Statement of the Fi-
 naEeiai Condition of Pima County.
 lst. He concludes tat the county IS losing over 5000 per snnum f.om urcoi- lected licenses. Is it not the fact ina: much fl the iOss comes from pSsons goin z ou. If Lnsinese?
 2nd. The expert might well have compared the total amounts paid the coanty to the sheriifs office for the first 6 months Of 'S4, for fees, and mileage, with ihe salary and mileage, under the Salary Act. The friends of the Salary Aci Uelleye that ID this there would be a large balance in favor of the county.
 5rd. He does not say how much mon ey tas gene to the constables ID the last SIX months. The fact is the amOuut Is small; not 10 be compared with the bills heretofore Ailowed for sherifT's mileage.
 4.h, He says: "a large proportion Of She "-iyil" and criminal business for neTlY done by the sheriff is now left to ;he constables, whose fees are allowed and certified to by the justices If the peace against tue county" Does be uot know that no fee in a civil case can by any means, bcooma a charge upon the county?
 9th. It is a good thing that "ihe sheriff hEs lost that incentive ;o work which his office formerly had, VIZ: fees" It vas reportei by the last grand jury that the sherif-s office had been receiving from S2O,0OO to s25,- coo per year. Everyone knows that Lis fees in civil cases did not amount to more than a tenth of those figures. The rest of 1t came from the county and was tbe result of work" Now s2,3l0I4 covers the entire cost of the sherifi's office for the quarter, and he turned in SO23 g, leaving the ne. cost Of his office for one quarter S1,6S6.75 against say s5.00O, for the corresponding quarter of last year.
 Gtb. The county court has disposed of one case involving water rights in the valley opposite Tucson, winch had almost culminated ID blOocshed, and TGs arfaylng two numerous and bitter factions agHInst each other. The dis posal of that single case was worth to this community twice the entire cost of inc court to this date. It would have taken tue District Court at least a year to dispose of ii; the county court was through with 1t m about thirty days.
 7tn. In estimating the county's lia- biiitIes 1t IS difficult to see why the School House bonds should be figured In. They are not county liabilities any more than are the bonds of the city of Tucson. The Board of Supervisors have nothing to do with them except 10 levy tue tax to pay them on property in School District No. l.
 It IS little curious, also to see the BosId's expert figuring in interest on Marrow Gauge bonSs, as proper iabil- ity of the county, when the Board has expressly repuIiated them as any liabIl- l ity. and forbidden the paymen, of in- teTest.
 lkesame is true of the Lobos bonds | he Board paid S3.5O0 60 the Lobos | Company, and have an absolute surren- | der Of the whole S500O0 of bonds sub !ect only 10 the clam of Hudson k | Cos assignee for about Sl6,O00' The | S3. .JO0 has been paid, and as the nost | tEe Sl6,u5U above should be charged to that iten. All these items together reduce the actual county indebtedness in the snug sum of S72,954l2