New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-04-09

EX-DEPUTY CONTROLLER GARRISON
CRITIC1SES THE FINDINGS OF THE
DOCKERY COMMISSION.
NECESSITY OF DOUBLE NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
AUDITORS NOT INDEPENDENT-THE NEW
SYSTEM WOULD REQUIRE ExPEN-
sIvE REORGANIZATION OF
CLERICAL. FORCES.
CLERICAL FORCES.

To the Editor OF The Tribune.
Sir: In the proposed reduction o. officials and
clerks and the so-called reform In the accounting
system OF the Treasury Department, recommended
by the Dockery Commission and their experts. max
Commission has chosen high and shining mark
at which 20 aim It's arrows OF destruction. Every
one familiar with the history OF the department
It's growth and development. knows that from time
10 time in later years a number OF Offices and
divisions have sprung into existence and expanded
without any wel-defne1 statutory authority. ana
with less apparent necessity. encroachng upon and
uslrping the duties which rightfuiiy and properly
belong to original bureaus. which came into ex-
istence when the department was established To
these apparently useless outgrowths OF later years
the Commission and its experts have not even paid
the cold respect Of a passing glance. Bu' the"
first blow Is delivered at office which ranks next
10 that Of Secretary OF the Treasury In dignity ana
jmportance which was created by the same act
(September 2 1880 which established the depart
ment and which has often been termed 1.-THE key
n the TREASURY because Of the high responsibility
which attaches to H. The First Controller. the
Second Controller and the Commissioner OF Gus
toms in the matter OF the final examination ana
certiAcation Of accounts and claims. each now
invested with the same powers and duties as was
conferred upon the Controller OF the Treasury by
the organic act Of 1879.
By the bills reported by the Commission ana IN
accordance with the recommendation o, ns eN-
perts the Offices OF Commissioner OF Customs ana
Second Controller are 10 be abolished outright. ana
the First Controller Is shorn Of his power ana
authority with respect the detailed and regular
examination certifcaton OF accounts and claims
in his office. In lieu thereof the First Controler'
who is TO be continued under the tit!e OF Controller
OF the Urea sury, to have a sort Of appellate jurs-
dlcton. which will meet the OF dissatisfied
claimants but affords no adequate or satisfactory
provision for appeal on behalf Of the Govern
ment Neither can the routine duty required OF
the Auditors IN the proposed REFORM 70 repoT 10
the Controller from time 10 time their decisions
upon the construction OF statutes operate as ssus-
factory or valuable check. Such reports. setting
forth the opinions Of the Auditors generally as TO
the construction Of the laws. may be interesting and
instructive reading for the Controller, should he
be inclined TO peruse them, but they viii not present
- him actual cases 20 consider and decide
Dlvesting the case " the ailurin2 inducements
thrown about It by the Commission ana It's eN-
merits and the promises that the sOcaled reform. II
adopted will 90 away with all the vex2tous de.ays
incident 10 the present system OF accounting. II is
sure 20 concentrate in the Auditor. In addition
70 his own duties hNeI by law. the nddi-
tional duties and powers OF the Controller. Ia II
move in the right direction to discard the We!-
known theory Of divided responsibility upon when
the Government is established. and to invest In one
officer or class of officers, sole power in auditing
and bassng upon the vast receipts and expenditures
OF the Government. which from the beginning nave
been exercised by Two separate ana lndcpehd"nt
officers or classes OF officers the one operating az
check upon the other? The Commission SAYS IN
s renort .It is clear that divided responsibility
does not nrotect the Government" II falls, now
ever 10 adduce or even allude to the facts or ar
ylIments upon which this sweeping assertion IS
grounded The experts in their report dispose OF
the matter in these terms: The present system OF
accounting Is practically but check as the audit
OF the Controller IS final and independen; OF any
IL
Government H. protected by the accounting branch
only so far as the audit Of the Controller ~ EN-
cent" This statement Is amusing 10 one thoroughly
familiar with the accounting system OF the Ireas
ury Can 1t b. reasonably supposed that the Auditor
IL not wholesome and sauary check upon the
Controller should the Controller be inclined 10 cor
rupt and dishonest action? II the Controller should
certify a Ease balance. or grossly vio2te The IA"
IN making allowance. sooner or later 1t must
come TO the knowledge OF the Auditor. and II he
IS not corrupt the derelicton OF the Controller
would be brought to light and punished. And So IL
mistake. fraud. or dishonesty in changing the
AUDITORS findings in account or claim inevitably
his action viii become known In the Auditors Office
In the ordinary course Of official business Every
counting Offices viii recognize the correctness OF
this position Therefore the dIyided Seo
as a very effectual check. The strong PROBABILITY
OF speedy detection is the most efficient safeguard
Controller Clerks in the office OF each are cor
rupted 1t Is weinGh Impossible 1nurr ne per- Inv
except that OF a skfu forger. which would not be
detected By experts In any business estabiishment;
A. few such forgerics have been perpetrated ana
escaped the scrutiny OF both accounting orcers.
but no great osses have arisen as the frauds nave
all been detected within comparatively snort pc |
RODS Compare this record with the stupendous
frauds and losses arising from systematic faisifl-
cation OF books and accounts, running through many
years in the accounting and fiscal offices or Snte
and municipal governments throughout the united
States and OF public and private corpora lions. ana
Il speaks the highest praise for the accounting
eva,ar, of the Treasury Depa although IL
NAV be characterized as cumbersome and anti |
nuat.d Pnt give 20 one officer or class OF officers.