Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-05-03
A FIELD FOR REFORMATION.

The Republican State Convention, in
indorsing the administration of Governor
Waterman, did good thing well and
straightforwardly. 1t declared very cor
rectly that the administration has demon
strated that the affairs of the State can be
conducted upon business principles with
satisfaction to the people and credit to the
State.
While the Governor is thus encouraged
TO foster practical and economic work in
State departments, he will find fine field
for special inquiry in the system in vogue
in the receipt and payment CT fees. Two
Legislatures have had their attention
called to the matter, but they were too
timid to take hold of evident evils and cor
rect them. We assert with confidence
that there will be no contradiction, that
the present system is disapproved by the
departments and would not be tolerated in
any commercial house in the State, nor
would it be accepted as satisfactory for the
conduct OF daily routine in corner gro
Gerry in the least of our villages. 1t is very
simple, and as weak and indefensible as it
is simple. Each department receiving
fees, independently collects them and at
stated periods makes return of the sum to
the Treasurer, paying over the amount
indicated in gross in the return There is
no check whatever upon the collecting
official, except that if any doubt arises
whether all fees collected have been paid
in, an expert may be called in by the Con-
troller-at heavy expense necessarily-to
overhaul all the papers in the departments
and ascertain, if he can, what the officials
should have charged, collected and paid
over.
Obviously this is no system at all worthy
the name; it opens the door widely to
temptation and invites to the Justification
of documents Moreover, it is not possible
to ascertain with accuracy, even by expert
examination of archives, precisely the
amount with which the department should
be debited for fees collected. But even by
examination of the fled papers and the
records, such an expert might be led to
debit to department fees which in fact it
never received. 1t is true each officer
keeps cash book in which he is expected
to enter all fees received, but it is needless
to explain that in business this would be
deemed no check at all A few years ago
1t was discovered that this gross weakness
IN the law had led to such discrepancies
between the total of fees the archives dis
closed, in more than one department,
would have been paid in, and the amounts
actually turned over during a series of
years, and under several administrations
that the matter became public scandal
and led to indictments and trials. While
the departments as now filled are not for
an instant brought into question, it is clear
that the fee collection system is such as to
make possible in the future that which
has been in the past
1t will be matter of comparative ease
for the Legislature to introduce system
that will establish perfect checks-as for
instance, the receipt of fees by one depart
ment only, upon certificate issued by an
other. But the Legislature will need to
be advised officially to such action, and
that the Executive will do so is to be as
sumed as a matter of course, since he has
manifested throughout desire for the in
PRODUCTION of business methods into public
business affairs.