The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-02-07
TRUSTEE KITS ORDERS.
A Clear Case of "Focalization of Favors'
PrOven-The Commissioners Object.

Township Trustee Kitz in his card, published
in the Journal On Thursday card pervaded by
sorrowful air of injured innocence, from the
opening line to the concluding autograph-con-
tains this paragraph: IF your reporter had
made further inquiries, where he made those
upon which his article was based, he would have
found that on last Monday l approved grocery
orders furnished by the five following erocers,
all of which were on file in the Commissioners
Court at the time your reporter got his informa-
ton"
This touched the reporter. The suggestion as
to the County Commissioners was good one
and yesterday afternoon the records Of that
court of audit were explored. Turning the
pages Of the month of July, 1884 the following
allowances for groceries for the poor of Center
township were found: j. Costello $50 30; James
Miley, 1922; Peter Spitzfaden, $172 80; Theo
Werner, $83; H. ]. Mauer, $22 Frank Under
man, 49, J. A. Mickey $1,000; Chris Schetter,
SIG: II. F. Schrader $106 05: j. III. Rothert,
$i98. Patrick j. Ryan's name does not appear
in the July record.
In August Patrick J. Ryan takes all in sight,
$14I2 70, and in September his grocery account is
$62O.25, the remainder of Mr.. kits favors being
distributed follows: Andrew Steffens. $14;
Henry Geisel, $3i; William Pfaff1in, $34, and
James Bridges $28 In October Patrick j.
Ryan's star appears to have reached it's zenith.
as on the sth of that month he received $778 90.
In November Ryan drew from the treasury only
1898. 80, while James Maey, the new favorite,
drew $263, and Peter thinner $28. In Deem
Der James Maley drew 1882. 30, and Ryan,
whose star had suddenly declined, $206
In January Maley took everything. as Ryan had
done before him, his order on the treasury call
ing for 1888. In the February payment, bills
for the preceding month, Maley was favored to
Aocn I ID al1O
animation of the figures readily substantiates
the statement made in the Journal as to Mr..
kits '.focalization of favors"
The County Commissioners called Mr.. Kitz
before them, and Intercepted him to his
methods of conducting the grocery business
Two witnesses, those whose names were given
in the Journal on Wednesday. were also brought
before that body. One of the witnesses testified
that having thought it over, he had no special
complaint to make against the way his order
upon the grocer had been filled. 1t came
out later in his testimony that
a young man, who he understood was
from Mr.. kits Office, had called on him with
a paper to sign, containing the statement that
the goods were of good quality and of full
weight. Mr.. Kitz asseverated that the young
man had not come from his Office, and that it
probable he came from the grocer. The
other witness insisted that the weights were
short on several OF the articles furnished to him,
and that instead of receiving load of coke. as
charged only half load had been sent him.
George Rigler claimed to have weighed articles
sent him, making these discoveries: the -four
was 10 pounds, not 12a, as it should have been;
bacon, Il pounds instead of 2 pounds sugar, of
pound instead of pound; coffee. of a pound
instead of pound.
An examination of the orders presented by the
grocers to the commissioners. and upon which
payment is made, shows as in the case of Maley,
whose bundle figures up $S8915 for the month
just closed, that not weight or quantity of an
article furnished is shown. The commissioners
were struck with this exceedingly loose way of
doing business-a method that certainly has an
appearance of dishonesty, whether it really
possesses it or not-and say it must be amended,
future bills to be made out in good business
form, Mr.. Kitz was plainly told by the com
missioners that his method of giving all nearly
all his business to one grocery would no longer
be countenanced, but that hereafter the patron
age must be divided