St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-03-06
Public Examiners EXamina-
ton Into the Finances Of
Ramsey County.
Mr.. Murnane INDICATED From
the Serious Charg es Lev
eled Against His Office.
Detailed Salary List Of Off
GERS and the Years Re-
ceipts and Expenses,
AS Well AS Critical Comments
Upon the Management Of
Departments.

Public Examiner Kenyon yesterday sub
mitted to-the governor his report on the
finances of Ramsey county, including state
ment of the examination made of the books
of the abstract office The report is dated
March /. and shows the receipts and disburse
ments from June /, 1890 to Feb. t. 1891. The
auditors books verified the receipts and pay
ments and show resources and liabilities in
the general accounts.
The renort deals with the question of the
salaries allowed the deputy clerks of court
and as regards the office Of the clerk OF
courts says:
By section > of chapter 1863, Special Laws
Of 1887, the clerk of the court is allowed the
sum or seven hundred dollars 900 per an
mum in full for certain specified services, ole
item OF service being given as copying i'll
dictments, and in one case this is given out
rs an item i'll the clerks bill and was al
lowed, which. while not of much importance
III amount shows carelesSneSs i'll scrutiniZing
the bills before allowing payment. This oc-
cured at three different times: in October
and November, 1889, and January, 1890. the
items being S51, $3.50 ana S2S. so respect
lively. in all Sl23. The clerk also charges for
making returns to the supreme court in the
eases IN which the county was party, viz:
Schumacher vs.. County Commissioners. Sl3 50
GOTHAM vs.. County Commissioners. Is As
De Graft vs. County Commissioners. =. II 20
The last case De Graft was appellant, and
It would seem, should have paid for return.
and in all cases the charge is nearly one-half
TOO much, as appears from the returns in the
office of the clerk of the supreme court.
The office of sheriff is also reported upon.
and the manner in which fees are charged
for deputies, also for summoning of grand
and petit jurors. On the subject of the tees
for deputies, Mr.. Kenyon, the examiner, says:
The sheriff is also allowed for bringing
prisoner before any court for examination,
Fl and 81 per day for attending court with
such prisoner. In many instances a deputy
sheriff has appeared in court on the same
day with different prisoners and charged a
per diem in each case, thus receiving double
per dien which can hardly be considered
the intention of the statute. After eXamina-
lion has been had, there are numerous cases
where the deputy sheriffs appeared in court
on following days with the same prisoner
and charged s. per day for attending such
prisoner, which IS contrary to the construc-
ton of the statute by the supreme court III
the case of Connelly vs.. County of Dakota,
% MINI. 800. However, il is but fair to the
sheriff to say that most of these cases are
where the prisoner is brought before the
municipal court, where the sheriff has no
deputy III constant attendance.
The balance of the report dealing with the
affairs of the abstract office, and statements
showing the state of the county finances and
salaries paid officials, is as follows:
In regard to the abstract office. a thorough
examination of the fees received as shown
10y the books of that Office. was mode, and
the following was found 10 be the situation
Jan, 81, 1891: