The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1888-11-01
COUNTY FINANCES.
The Citizens Committee Reply to
the Commissioners Court.
And Judge Fillmore Takes a
Hand in the Controversy.

| To the People of Travis County:
! We submit the following reply to the
I statement relating to county finances
made by Judge Breckenridge and the
county com mis5iOners, as the same APP
pears in The STATESMAN of October 26:
! This statement is incomplete, full of il
accurscies, and is grossly erroneous and
| unloading.
! In making our statement we confined
ourselves TO the actual receipts and dis
| bursements made under Judge FUlmOre's
administration during his last term from
its beginning until he turned over the Of
fee to Judge Breckenridge. And as to
Judge Breckenridge, to the actual receipts
and disbursements, shown by his own rec
ords, from the day he entered upon the
duties of his Office to October 8, 1883, the
day on which our statsment was made.
From the beginning OF Judge Fulmore's
last term to its close the actual amount
of money paid out of the county treasury
on account of the general fund was as
follows:
For the second 523'l ~
Total for two Tsars ...-',........ Sbo, SOY w
This statement is verified by the official
records of Travis county.
From the time Judge Breckenridge
went into office. and the exact date is i'm
material, to August Is, 1888, twenty-one
mon tbs, the amount of money actually
paid out of the county treasury on &C
count of the general fuad is as follows:
For the first year ending November Is,
For nine months from November is,
1857, 90 August Is, lSSo ......,....... 81 3Sl gS
Betwe 4 August Is and October :, 1855,
the CO1-ty treasurer paid warrants on
the gsnsrsl fund amounting 80 the
sum Of ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. $685. %
This a1t=t 70 the amount pald To Au-
gust 10 mazss.......'" So,V@o %
And this is the actual cash expenditures
by Judge Breckenridge from Noveubec
Is, 1857, to October s, 1885, And the
total expenditures out of the general
fund in money actually paid out would be
as follows:
Fl.gt year 20 November IS, 1857 .......s 43 81 Is
second year to October 3, 1855 ....... 36,O26 SO
Total for term of Office Up to October S,
ls-c ....,........... $500 81
These are the actual cash payments out
of the general fund only.
On October g. 1888, the general fund
was exhausted, and the following debts
against this fund had e. that date, been
Incurred, to-wit:
First-Warrants Issued to tie Diebold
safe and LOCK company, bearing inter
est Ct the rate Of per IT.
Roberts, bearing interest at per cent. $500 %
Third-M Miscellaneous warrants outstand.
ing and unpaid. 4,l96 %
Total Indebtedness against the general
fund October d looo. %
This represents the expenditures be-
yond the receipts of revenue for the gen.
eral fund, and should be added to the sum
actually paid out prior to October 8, 1888,
as follows: ST9,S67s4. This makes Judge
Brackenridge's expenditures out of the
the general fund, paid and unpaid, up to
October 8, 1888, $50, 699.70.
Our statement heretofore Published is
absolutely correct, except that we did not
include in ths charges against the general
fund the item for $500 due Governor
Roberts and the $3,664. 50 paid on war
rants between August Is and October 8,
1888. The omission of these items was to
the benefit of Judge Breckenridge in the
sum of S6,164.5S on bis expenditures from
NONOuDOl AZ, -OO'b W OSVObOA - ACCS'
In our statement there is included in
the unpaid claims constituting the out
standing Indebtedness of the county the
sum of $2,76O.72, which belongs to the
road and bridge fund, and the $1,000 co
due J H. Raymond & Co., which also be-
longs to the road and bridge fun3.
The amount of indebtedness
as contained in ol- statement
including these items is......,.. 23I,H52 80
From this deduct the following
items, being charges against
the road and bridge fund
/. Outstanding warrants TN
paid on Oct. g. 1885. ............ S2,1G0 -
,. Warrants held by J. II. Fay
-2-3,76) %
Balance against zen. fund. 2lT,}3l Sc
Gov, o. N. Roberts ...'.. $500 o.
Genera fSad on Oct. 5, SIS 1881 So
On October 8, 1888, the road and bridge
fund was indebted as follows:
First-On warrants npsid,....---.......32,7 60 %
Second-To j. L. Raymond i Co.,. n,OOO 90
1otA ...''.''.''' SL5,'oJ 20
This represents an expenditure on
roads and bridges, beyond the receipts of
revenue of this sum of. $13,760.75.
The indebtedness of the county on both
thsse funds ever October s, 1883, was as
follows:
~ -