Los Angeles herald., 1890-06-09


wants to see justice done, and will see
that everyone gets it; and yet in the
face of all these declarations he is the
first one to post the Times reporter
that "Bob'' Platt was boodler-yes, he
was short in his accounts 81, 7O0-and
also made the statement that no county
official had been half so much trouble to
them (the board) as l had; he was al
ways late in making his reports, in fact,
constant annoyance to them, SO much
so that l doubt if they ever slept well
nights, and yet up to date they MOI
their foreign experts have been able to
show one cent misappropriated.
The so-called experts, viz, Messrs.
Blackman and Monroe, who have been
recommended as being so well up in
their business, did in no wise demon
strate the fact when they handed in
their report, seemingly cooked and
dried, as the latter gentleman made his
boasts about what he would do if he
ever got favorable opportunity. lean,
in our Angel City, pick out any num-
ber of native born lads of 20 and 2l who
will beat them two to one, and stand
prepared to back up my assertions.
Again, in February last, they pick out
certain county officers, viz, assessor,
tax collector, recorder and auditor, and
say they shall be all reduced in salary,
yet they rescinded the order after it had
been in force one month. Again, in
April last, they had become so much in
terested in the subscriber that they
communicated with several of my
friends in Colorado to find out if l was
wanted there for any misdemeanor,
whether l could be trusted with the
peoples money or not, and what sort of
a man was in general. OF course they
found out nothing. Again, on May 9th
last, that able financier, Superintendent
Hubbard, of San Fernando, acting as a
committee of one, offered the resolu-
tion that from that date the
collector should be allowed no
deputies-he never having taken the
trouble to come to our department to
find out whether we needed any help or
not. Great man! He knows no more
about running an Office than ten-year-
old boy, yet he and Messrs. Davis and
Perry presume to know all about such
things, and for some slight inattention
on my part to their respected person.
ages, the whole department is made to
sutfer-presuming also that | as the tax
collector of Los Angeles county had
nothing Ito say in the matter as to
whom or how many deputies l should
hire. God forbid the government to be
run by such menl Again, these cele-
brated statesmen make the statement
that it costs more to run the office under
my administration than under that of
any former collector. Let the people
themselves consider the difference of
the extra cost in the way of few dollars
and the difference in the accommodation
as rendered by us since January s, 1889.
| simply ask the taxpayers OF Los An
geles county to answer these questions
themselves if anyone can prove to me
in any way that any former collector
has ever made any sort of a report of the
collections of his office, viz as to the
collections at city rate, country rate, seq
regation as to school and road district,
daily and monthly, being able at any
time to tell just how much has been col
lected to date for each. Again, l have
staid in the Office during November and
December from fourteen to sixteen hours
daily, and attended personally to all
matters received and forwarded Ii the
people can name any one who has ever
done any better, or one-half so we'll,
kindly bring him out.
In regard to my final settlement,
wish to submit the report OF the experts,
which cost S702 of the peoples hard
earned money.
Los ANGELES, Cal, May 2, 1890
The Honorable, the Board Of Supervisors for Los
Angeles County:
GENTLEMEN-I have examined the books of
the county taxes for the year 1S99-9O. and sub
nit the following figures as the result:
Total amount collected as shown
by the footings of the thirty
nine volumes of assessment
roll, including delinquent vol
unes observation-disclosures. s. 1,353,5l2 10
Paid to the county treasurer and
amounts verified ............ sl,353, 1854 IA
Balances unaccounted ..... s15e o5
County tax collectors cash book
shows total amount collected
by their daily receipts .......... 81 1856, ,099 IA
Amount paid treasurer .......... 81 1855, ,354 IA
Balance as per cash book. $2,745 20
certify the foregoing to be correct.
w. r. BLACKMAN,
Public Accountant.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7th
day of May, 1890. CHAs. II DUNsMooR,
Clerk.
Bye. W. BLAKE, Deputy.
You will see by the above report that
there are but two grand totals. One
deducted from the other brings me out
$15S.05 short. In the footings of the cash
blotter lam brought out $2,745.65 short.
The two amounts in which l am shown
by their report to be short l have ac-
counted for in my reports to the board,
the $2,745 being the amount refunded
to parties paying it in error, and on
Orange county property and double or
overpayments.
In vol. ID, Monroe, the expert over
charged me 1852, which leaves me a
credit balance of 1896 on the report as
to volumes Who can tell by the above
report how much / was originally
charged with, or what my total indebted
ness to the county was or the final
settlement?
On November 4th was charged
with. ,.............. ...-... s1,5O8,736 80
January 1st, per cent. on
delinquent tax aX................ 6,815 So
Up to March 18th, advertising $500 OO
Costs of certificates of sale ..... 3,699 90
Making my total debt. ..... 81 ,527, ,753 4O
Yet this very expert accountant only
accounts for 81, 353, ,512.19, difference
of $174, ,241.21 unaccounted for by him,
but which l have accounted for in item
lied statements furnished the board
monthly. BY referring to the total
amount l was charged with and the
amounts turned into the treasury, which
was but the work of very few mo-
ments, it could be easily seen that was
NOT cbort ono oapt op6 that thara uyo G