The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1888-06-13

" VOLUME :
fund must be sworn to by the claimant,
and signed by a majority of the Board oi
Trustees, before the same shall be ap-
proved by the School Com missioner; and
Sec. 1923 of the same prohibits the Treas
urer from paying any school claim unless
so made out.
Although such Is the law it is neverthe-
less fact that great many of the school
claims paid by him have not been sworn
to at all, and perhaps majority of them
have been signed by only one member OF
the Board Of Trustees.
We find that it is common prac-
tice with him to pay claims on what
are termed informal orders which
are drawn by the Clerk of the
County Commissioners In the absence oi
the Board and before the claims en- which
said orders are based have ever been
passed upon by the Commissioners. We
have found where quite number Of
claims were paid, on such informal or
ders, in the latter part of May or first OF
June, out Of the May collection of taxes,
when the original claims for the payment
of which these informal orders were
drawn, were not approved by the Com.
missioners until the following Septem-
ber. Thus it will be seen, the Treasurer
violated the law in this transaction land
he does 80 in every such transaction) in
two particulars. First, in that he paid
claims against the County before the
same were audited by the County Com
missioners and second, in that he paid
such claims other than upon the check
of said Commissioners. In every such
transaction Of course the County Com
mission srs are as much to blame for
drawing orders in this irregular way, or
for suffering their Clerk TO do 80, as is the
Treasurer for paying them.
AS to the fact of his having collected
some 81, l,5OO on account OF the county and
school fund in 1880, and with which he
failed to charge himself or to make any
accounting until recently. we would state
that in 1873 the State authorities, antici.
pating that bills of the Bank Of the State
would in certain cases be rendered for
taxes for that year, instructed the several
County Treasurers of the State not to re-
ceipt for the same should they be SO ten
dered, but to count them and seal them
up in a package, where they were to re-
main until the question should be settled
in the Courts as to whether or not said
bills were receivable for taxes.
1t seems that in this county the G. & g..
Railroad Company rendered such Bank
Bills for the taxes due by said Company
for that year but the question was not ar
gued in the Court until the spring
of 1880, when it came up before Judge
Kershaw in the city of Columbia. It
was decided by him that said Bank Bills
were not receivable for taxes and an or
der was made requiring the Receiver OF
the Railroad to take up said Bank Bills
and to substitute good and current money
for the same.
This the Receiver did on the 9Th day Of
June, 1880, as appears from the Treas
urer's receipt as found among the Rail-
road papers in the Masters Office in Col
umbia, since this investigation was be-
gun, but he (the Treasurer) made no
entry in his books by which to charge
himself with the amount so collected nor
did he notify the Auditor of the fact, In
order that he might charge him with 1t
and of course the Auditor did not nor
could he charge him with matter not
found on his books and Of which he had
no knowledge whatever-and thus the
matter stood up to within few weeks
back. .-... ..
The whole amount of said Railroad tax
was $2,6l6.46, of which 81, 12l.66 was on
account of State taxes; $096.55 for the
County, and s49S.25 on account of the
public schools.
The portion belonging to the State was
paid to the State Treasurer, as per receipt
held by the County Treasurer, In a few
days after the same was received, and
that belonging to the County and School
fund has been paid out within the last six
weeks.
We investigated several of the annual
settlements made by the County Auditor
with the Treasurer and found more or
less errors in all of those we examined.
In the settlement for the fiscal year OF
1888 the Treasurer was given credit for
$3.50, as having been paid by him to the
School Commissioner on account Of his
salary, when as matter Of fact he paid
said officer only $500.
It seems that the Treasurer advanced
to the School Commissioner in the early
part of the year $3.50 on his salary and
took his receipt for the same. When the
Commissioner made out his account at
the end of the fiscal year for the entire
amount of his salary, this advance was
deducted and only the balance was paid
him, las to which fact they are both
agreed), but the receipt for the $3.50 was
not taken up by the School Commits
sioner.
In the annual settlement between the
Auditor and Treasurer for that year he
(the Treasurer) was given credit for the
entire amount of the account as we'll as
for the $3.50 advanced on the same.
Again, in the settlement for the next