St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-09-04

alley block 0. NJ. NJ. collected in addi-
ton to what is shown to the credit of
Account No. 142. Neither the $609.56
nor the S125 before mentioned can be
found among the receipts in the cash
account. Where there is a credit there
must also be debt, but where is the
cash deblted here for what is said was
received?
Account No. lis. tax levy certificates
OF Indebtedness, shows that &. 019, 900 of
tax levy certificates were issued in 1892
and shows the funds for which they
were issued.
NOW turn 10 the cash account under
the same head and you will find the
amount given as 800, ZOO, making a diff
ference of Sl14,000 fer which certificates
were evidently issued, but which are
not accounted for in the cash, nor does
the report say where they are if they
were Invested in the city funds,in which
case they should have shown to be On
hand alongside Of the cash balance the
same as III similar cases the year nre-
vious. See report of 1891. which ives
tie certificates on hand invested in elLy
FUNDS and their numbers. -.
Now. where are the STA, 500?
Account NO. 4, city park fund, shows
warrants paid" S201, 1919. Now, you
look III the disbursements in the cash
account, page Il, aud you will find,
park commissioners warrants. SI14,-
Sl5.27. difference of SIS, 1863 %, which
is said to be paid out more on the one
page than on the other; besides. there
don't appear to have been as many war
rants issued at all as can be seen by the
eomptroiler's report, Exhibit No. "a.
Inc balance to the credit of the fund
at the beginning of 1892 was $50, 500. IA ::
AT tiltt end nf tho nt,tt @.
with the credit balances transferred and
CASH receipts the account toots up $2235,-
063.69. But where did it get to? The
transfers don't account for it. and don't
agree with each other in several in
stances, and where is the difference
above noted in the amount reported as
paid out, $50. 269.92?-
Account No. =I2, Pleasant avenue
bridge. shows an amount of $40. 900
placed to its credit and charged to the
general fund, but when you want to see
what mas become ofthe $40, 600 you see
notnliig but the entry, "Sundries, S2O.-
Ooo, and that's all; and what's peculiar.
nowhere else Is it shown in the reports
that anything was paid out at all in the
reports.
Now, what has become of the $50. 600?
Inc above are few facts of the dis
crepancles with which the report is
hlled, but they are sufficient to show to
every Intelligent mind, by simply re-
Iefring TO the pages Of the report, that
the accounts do hot agree, and that if
the report is claimed to give the ac-
counts as they appear on the books.
then both must be wrong and cannot
agree or properly balance. With the
exception OF typographical errors, per
maps, which might sometimes occur, and
OF whicn scarcely any appear in the re-
ports before you, and can
EASILY BE DETECTED,
there is absolutely no excuse whatever
for any II istakeS in these reports. Dar-
ticuiarly III those parts dealing with
the cash account and the fund accounts.
Inc ofhclal annual report is required
ny law, ana Is for the public and tax
payer In order to furnish the means for
every citizen to satisfy himself without
examining the books of the trea,urer's
once as to the condition of the treasury
and the different fund accounts.
1heSe annual reports are made at the
emo, or tile fiscal year, when all the
BOOKS are supposed to have been
checked over, and to give the true con-
ditlon OF things after all errors have
oeen corrected and all charges,
Daek charges and transfers have
giving the desired information without
looking over the books or hiring experts
10 90 SO. 10 omit from what is intended
to be the balonce sheet, certain fund
balances which are clearly given under
the proper accounts without any at
Tempt to show where they got to, Is Ger
talniy subject to the gravest reflections
On the other hand, the appearance of a
smaller sum or the entire omission Of
Such as appears as actually collected or
placed to the credit OF an account, and
the failure to property charge the cash
account with the same, is most certainly
a most marvellous piece of stupidity il
nothing else, particularly in an official
annual report. required by law, and IN
tended for the use of the public at large.
and certainly calls for serious attention.
Homeesekers' Special Rates to the