The record-union., 1895-11-18
As TO A CITY SAFE And VAULT.
Views of Trustee-eIeCt Mckay and
Trustee leonard.
The Care of the City Money-The Prin-
cipal Involved-The Present
System Wrong.

TruStee-elect Mckay was seen by
Record Union reporter on Saturday re-
garding the treasury question. Mr..
Mckay was inclined to be reserved. He
said he had not given the matter the
necessary thought to warrant express
sion of opinion for print. While he did
not believe in nominal Treasurerships,
and would stand by the law, whatever
! it is, he recognized as a fact that the
city money in a bank is means to en-
able banks to accommodate business
men. The banks do so accommodate
them, and if one has city money in COM
mercial use, then it is reasonable to sup
pose that such public treasure assists
the banks Merchants have to carry
the farmers. and many of the workers,
and the merchants in turn must be car
ried, to a certain extent, by the banks
He thought, too, that the city money
in bank was under added security.
True, if the bank is really the Treasurer,
then it Is farcical to have a Treasurer
at all. but he did not feel well enough in
formed on these points to express posi-
tive opinion. If the decision is that it is
unlawful to keep the money in a bank,
then the law must be complied with.
safe might be had that would hold the
money safely enough, but even then he
should favor a watchman.
He did not deny that as a matter of
| prlnciple, public funds should not be
used as private banking capital, yet he
! realized that to do so with perfectly safe
| institutions, like the California State
Bank might much conserve business in
| terests. He saw no insuperable Obsta-
cles to setting up the Treasurer's office
! independently of a bank, if it is the
! law that this must be done, and in that
case he.would stand by the law. If it
! is shown that the city can do as the Rec
ord Union suggests, and the law COM
mands it, the thing must be done. lie,
| however, made all these statements
| with the reservation that he might
reach better or other conclusions when
he had studied the charter and thought
over the matter more, as he intends to
| do
A call was next made upon Trustee
Leonard, who said, to express his views
| briefly:
The proposition concerning the care
| Of the funds and their actual custody by
| the Treasurer is sound. OF that | have
! long been convinced. do not know,
! bat believe that city funds in banks are
used as banking capital. But it is rec
| cgniZed that our banks are sound. Y ct
the principle involved is as you state it
/ in the RecOrd-Unb
II feel that we ought not to demand
| Of the Treasurer that he take any Seri-
Gus risk so long as we have not a City
! Hall or vault for him. AS to building a
vault. where would you put it? Surely
rot upstairs where we now have the
| city Offices As to a safe where would
| that be put? l like the idea of renting
| space for safe in a secure vault. how
ever. Under present conditions that is
| the thing 1 should favor if any change
should be made.
| But should we make a change now?
That is the real question. If it is feas
ible TO keep the funds in safe, and that
| in a vault. that would be the thing TO
do. if anything. What this city needs
badly is a City Hall Yes, 100000
| would give us a neat building. As to
| issuing city bonds to build it, what show
have We? We wanted to do that for
| sewerage, and the Mayor sat down on
lit and even said he would not sign the
bonds if we overrode him and issued
them.
Yes. I recognize the fact that the
| principle is wrong that permits any
other than the Treasurer elected and
qualified to hold the city money. AS to
| tn, vault in Mr. Carmichael's present
Office, l know nothing. IT, as you say,
1t can be fitted with secure door and a
| safe is put inside it that is burglar
proof, that might do. But / know moth
ing of it by examination. A safe out
side of a secure vault or building would
not do 1t would mean watchman.
But suppose we concede the watchman,
these guardians sometimes neglect
duty. Frequently they have been over
come, and a robbery effected. There
are very many instances of that.
"A watchman means $500 a year
more, and the question is, is it now ad-
visable, with the risk involved? Show
me any way to make the funds secure
in a safe, and I am agreed with you.
You are right on the general propo-
sition as to care of the funds. AS to
that have no doubt. The Treasurer
ought TO be such in fact. 1 rather like
the proposition to get a safe and rent
vault room for it. If anything is done
now that seems to me the best plan.