The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-02-18
TRANSACTIONS IN SWAMP LANDS.
A Badly Mixed Account Between the Coun-
ties and the State Treasury.

In compliance with a resolution passed by the
House, State Auditor Rice has prepared de-
tailed statement of all the transactions in swamp
lands in the State since the passage of the first
act authorizing their sale, passed by the Legs
iature OF 1851 The resolution was introduced
by Representative Taylor of Daviess county, who
fondly imagined that there was was balance in
the Treasury due his county on that account
The investigation, however, reveals the fact that
Daviess county has overdrawn it's ae-
count with the fund $1.77L 80. The reso-
luton required the Auditor to ascertain
~ the number of acres Of swamp lands sold in
each county since the passage of the bill author
izing such sales; I'll. the amount of money re-
ceived from the United States for lands sold by
the government since the lands were transferred
to the State; 81, the amount credited each coun-
ty for lands sold within its boundaries; a.
the amount charged to each county for drainage
and ditching; ~, the amount due each county
where it was entitled to credits; and (6l, the
amount of overdrafts by each county, where
there were SUCH Auditor Rice reports that the
duties imposed upon him by the resolution were
exceedingly onerous, and that it has been utterly
impossible to secure correct itemized statement
of all the transactions. ''The books in which
these transactions were recorded" says the re-
port, ''have hardly had an entry made in them
for twenty years. They were slowed away in
forgotten hooks by some of my remote predeceS
and were SO covered with dust and dirt that
1t was hardly possible to recognize many of the
Endorsements; and the reports of officers and
committees on the subject exist only Ill docu-
mentary journals quite and not at
hand. To give detailed statement, as required,
would necessitate a complete examination OF all
the original receipts and vouchers, and the
transaction written anew; and the books and
records SO mixed that their discrepancies can
not De explained without complete 1nvestga-
ton of all papers since the first act of 1851,
which would require several months time, and
an unusual amount of labor"
The records of the Office show that the provis-
ions of the law of 1857, requiring the Auditor to
ascerta..- the amounts received from the United
States and the amount of sales by registers and
receivers at United States land offices, have been
complied with, but there is nothing to show that
the amount received from the sales in each coun-
ty nor the amounts due them over dis
tributed.
The books do not show that the provision of
the law of 1857, requiring the Auditor and Treas
urer to certify to each county the balance In the
treasury belonging to said county, after making
the necessary credits and debts was ever COM
piled with. But little attention ever paid,
so far as the books show to the provision requir-
ing the Treasurer to keep on hand the balance
due each county, and pay the Auditors warrants
thereon for ditching and draining as many of
the counties have been allowed to overdraw their
accounts in the fund. The provision giving the
State Auditor l per cent and the State Treas
urer one half per cent. on the amount due each
county has, according to the report, been liter
ally carried out, they having drawn their per-
centages with becoming regularity"
According to the showing in book, purport
ing to be the work of legislative committee of
1860 and 1861" continues the report, ''or-
ganiZed to investigate the status OF the accounts
at the time, the sum of $3.50 523 Al was prorated
as charges among the several counties as their
respective shares Of the general expense fund,
while the itemiZed accounts of the fund show
total of but $95 064 46. The date of the work is
not given nor the date OF any of the vouchers
for the expenditures"
The report concludes with a table based on
the report of the committee above referred to,
showing: First, the number of acres patented
in each county; second the amounts paid for
various purposes; third amount of receipts from
sales fourth, balance due and overdrafts up to
May, 1873 1.-THE date of the transfer to the gen
eral fund.- to which have been added the
ceipts and expenditures since that date to the
present Auditor Rice adds: "Tho only thing
that casts discredit on these records is the dis
crepancy which has been alluded to between the
itemized statement of the general expense fund
and the amount prorated to the counties. /
have checked the books and find that, up to the
time this committee made its report, $lG0, 504. 50
were expended, which was not charged to the
counties. There is evidently some discrepancy
between the swamp-land records and general
books of this Office, which is not apparent the
face of either record, which | am unable to dis
cover" The report of the committee OF 1861
was taken as the basis for the report because it
was found to be the only record in the Office
that compares with the original receipts and
vouchers in most particulars. The totals show
the amount of expenditures to be 81, no, 938 40;
total receipts ST. 705, S62. SO; total balance due,
SAG, 594, 49, total overdrafts, SOL go 81. This
shows balance due the State from the counties
| of So, 076.04