The weekly Elko independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 1872-1887, 1886-05-16
.'Eo- GULLY

Grand Jury which presented that aocu-
sa;i,u. aud TO this ~rit'r IA Is
charged with ins,igating the suit, A.
will as fer the information of the tax
papers OF Exc county. l deem it but
just that "A few facts touching upon his
recoul Us ex-ofi.io County Auditor,
should lie gwen To- the pu,uc.
Mr.. Rogers WAS elected to the Office
in January, 1885. as the cl ampiun of
! Official ecOuomy. aud made frequent
| boasts that as Aulitos Of the county he
would sec that there were ~ illegal eX-
pcuiturrs of the county revenues dur
ing his administration. How we'll he
kept this prumis 50 far ~ Mr. Rogers
l. coucrrueI. | now propose to show:
The law known a. the S. AIRY Act Of
ISL? Ets repealed 10y an Act u. the l. X
islaiure approved March l, lS>j, lser
Statutes Of 1883. page 1Sl, and in its
stead Ss,s passed "Au Act - regulate
fees and compensation for official ami
other services IN the State OF Nevada,
aud 10 repeal all Other Acts in rrlati IL
! thereto. approved FcbTas ~ -, 1855"
(Scc Statutes OF 1883. page 90. Sec
ton A OF this At leads a. follows:
This Act shall take effect ON the t.s,
Monday in JaLuary, ls~5, and this i
the date on which W. ". Rogers en-
tered upon III, duties as County Re
curIer and ex-"ticio Auditor. anil this
Act defines the fees and compensation
to which Lac is entitled during his term
of office.
The fees Of the Comfy Recorder nre
enumerated i'll Sec. 4. page -, and the
fees Of County Auditor ARE enumerated
in the same Act On page %, Statutes OF
1883, which is rs follows: The fees
Of County Auditor, shall he "a fol-
lows: For fling T~!cIsurer's receipts
aud issuing hccusrs to Nc paid 10y the
party, twenty-five cents; the County
Auditor shall receive for all services
rendered by him in the discharge
Of the duties imposed on him by
law, other than those especially
enumerated, for each folio, twenty
cents; for filing aud endorsing each pa
per, twenty c"uts, except the property
schedules, for which he shall receive nO
fec" Nov, it i, a mater Of fact that,
Notwithstanding this plain statute which
fixes his compensation u, County Aud
itor, for fling each paper twenty
cents, lie for mint months charged.
and was paid by the county, thirty
cents for filing each paper, au excess of
30 per cent. above the fees allowed by
law, and as no one who knows Mr.. I;pg.
ers will give him credit for being an IL
nornmaS. lac must have examined the
law AMI ascertalmrd something as TO the
eLOlumentS OF the office before Le ever
offered himself rs a candidate.
1t is true tha, the District Attorney
examined all those bills containing the
illegal charges, and ia the presence Of
the Il ard OF Commissioners pronounced
them correct, but this ignorance Of law
on the part of the District Attorney Is
no excuse roc AN officer who is supposed
- have II sufficient amOu Of co'a,nou
sense to unicr,taud n plain statute
which define, what compensate OF hc is
emitted to. During the first nine
months ot 1885 every ill presented to
the Commissioners, all Of which were
allowed and paid, contained illegal
charges aS follows: Bill for services III
January, lSsj, contained ovcrchargrs
to the amount of Sll 90; bill of Fehru-
AIRY, ovcrclnrgcS, so 30: bal Of March,
oyerchnrgrs. ~ %; hill of April, over
charges. SIS 30; bill Of May, over
charges. SD 30; bill Of June, over
charges, S2l 90; Iii | OF July, over.
charges, SIS 10; hill Of August, over
chGrgcs. IS %: bill of September, over
charges, SIS so. The bill for October,
1856, was presented t" the Commissions
ers Nov. 2, 1886. containing the usual
amount of OyrrchnrEcs, aud ut that
meeting Of the Board, through no fault
Of the IN tr,ct Attorney, it was diScoy-
c."d that the Auditor was charging and
receiving from thc county ~ per cent.
more for Auditors fees than the law ~.
lowed, aud the bill was laid over. The
amounts designated above AZ oycrcharg-
as nic the charges Of thirty cents Tor i'll
ing papers as Auditor instead Of twenty
cents as allowed by law, and rnch bill
was examined and compared with the
law by the District Attorney ut u meet
ing Of the Commissioners February 2,
1886, and the several amounts are those
gwen 10y that officer at the meeting nc.
ferrcd to.
Mr.. Rogers Claims That he was ignor.
ant Of the law ia reference t. the fees
allowed to Auditors, but II that be the
case, why il II that the second entry lac
made in his fee book in January. 1885,
is, "Jnn. .. to filing IL county bills.
81 10" which is twenty cents for each
paper filed, aud in accordance With the
Stututci How does IL cuIHc that lac
charged just what the law allowed, il lac
did not know what the law WASP The
solution Of this problem is left TO the
public.
But Mr.. Rogers claims that ho paid
into tho County Treasury SlG3 co.
which he had collected Illegally. liut
when was this amount refunded? Was
II immediately nfirr tho Bnnrl u Com.