Democratic Northwest and Henry County news. [volume] (Napoleon, O. [Ohio]) 1894-1905, 1895-01-24

after the taxes are paid In for tha purpose.t
The ianitor's salary, fuel, oil and other
orders were drawn out of building fund
which should have been drawn out of county
fund. Had all orders been drawn on CouDty
that the law requires, it would be still flrih-
er from a self. sustaining basis than this re-
port shows.
BRIDGE FUND.
We find the balance on hand in this fund
on Sept. 1st, 1894, amounted TO $40 540.34.
The Commissioners at their June session,
1894, levied for bridge and road purpose
mills on the taxable valuation of the county
viii h, when collected, will amount to nearly
$50 600, making total receipts in this fund
Of nearly $4,000. We are of the opinion
that said levy is too high, and that the Com
missioners should be more careful in making
the same. Why it should cost nearly $4,000
for bridge and road purposes in this county
this year and only S14,62l77 last year, we
are unable to comprehend.
BUILDING FUND.
We find that on Sept lat, 1893. there was
balance in this fund of $8,564.07, which,
with the collection on the duplicate and
81, 900 transferred into it by special act Of
the legislature, from the poor fund, amount
ed to S25,265, The amount expended in
this fund was only S2,442 Sc, which, il a
transfer had not been made from said fund
to county fund, would have left unexpended
in said fund 22,622.05. On August 28th.
1894, $4,000 was transferred from this fund
to county fund as stated above. leaving a
balance still in said fund of Sc, 6,82205. What
the Commissioners meant by making levy
of mill for building fund purposes with
such handsome balance is what we are un-
able to explain. No levy should have been
made for this purpose for the year 1894.
The Statutes provides that the levy can be
made only for building county buildings
purchasing sites therefor and lands for in.
frmary purposes, and the balance in this
fund on September 1st, 1894, was far above
the sum needed to meet all apparent de-
mands. As heretofore stated, orders were
drawn on this fund which should have been
drawn on county fund.
GENERAL COUNTY DITCH FUND.
We find the amount on hand in this fund
on September 1st, 1898, was $13,176.11, with
the collection for the year and amount certi-
fed into it, this fund shows receipts of $780,
1851. The expenditures including orders
for special ditch work was $45. .269.21, leaving
surplus of $14, ,890.40. Such would have
been the condition of the fund if the Com
missioners had not by resolution of May 7th,
1894, transferred money belonging to gen.
eral ditch fund into road impr ovement
sunds 6, 7, 8, 8, 12 13, 16, II, 20 and 81. On
Aug .l27th, '94, the amount transferred from
general ditch fund into said road improve
meut funds and road fand was 1872. Al.
This transfer was illegal and void as funds
can not be transferred from general fund,
even temporarily without special set of
legislature. But even with this drain on the
general ditch fund we still find a balance in
it on Sept. 1st, 1894, of $3,377.99. The law
provides that the Commissioners shall levy,
at their March session, not to exceed $40 Of
mill for general ditch purposes. We find
that the Commissioners levied for this pur-
pose 6-10 of mill, and at their June session,
which imperls validity of whole levy. This
fund, also, is heavily drawn on by orders
which 8 ould have been drawn on county
fund as hereinbefore stated.
ROAD IMPROVEMENT FUND.
Since we commenced examining this re-
port supplemental report has been fur
nished this committee, showing the condi-
ton of the several road improvement funds,
which had been omitted. We find that hese
funds have all been balanced by transfer.
In addition to the 1,5l241, transferred
provement funds and one road fund, we find
that surplus in road improvements 10, a.
IL, 10, and 90, amounting to SS72.18, was
also transferred into said road improvement
funds, number 6 and 9, by resolution oi
Commissioners of May 7, 1894; this transfer
was illegal as the law states plainly wher
there is balance in any road improvement
fund it shall be certified back to the town
ship trustees of the township wherein tht
said road improvements are located for tht
benefit of said road improvement.
SINKING FUND.
We find that on Sept. lst, 1898, this funt
had balance of $S,77994, with the collec
ton for 1894 would make total receipts ot
$28, ,406 23. OF this amount $15,66234 was
paid out in the redemption of $4,000 pei
cent. court house and Jail bonds, and thu
bonded for which the special levy of l mil
provides. There was balance on hand il
said fund on Sept. 1st, 1894, of $7,093,oo
In view of the fact that the Commissioner:
were compelled to make an Unnecessary lev!
| in the road and bridge fund and in the elec
ton fund and in the general ditch fund, al
to support the inadequate county fund, We
consider the redemption of undue 4 per CEN
bonds at premium, a very unwise tnancia
transaction. Mark we do not disapprove o.
paying off the county bonds as speedily a
possible, but we strenuously insist that 81
long as the Commissioners find it necessar,
to levy taxes unnecessarily for the purpose
levied, and only intended to be used to de
should not for mere ostentation use tha
J money to redeem undue bonds, the cheapes
J the county ever issued, and with three e1
; ceptions the cheapest any county in tn
= state ever issued. 1t would In our opinio
4 have been better tinanceering to have oml
5 ted so much of their unnecessary and exc
0 bitant levies and let the tax payers haveltl
Q benefit of per cent money. =,
The Recorder has presented bills and Il
y Commissioners allowed him for indexil
and making out report $27660. OF th
amount $261 go was for lndexipg. The pre-
ent Recorder was elected und.r the Garb
Jaw which states positively that the Record
shall charge the party presenting t
instrument for record ten cents for INDEX
the same. We can find no law allowing t
70 Recorder any sum for making out repo
1t is but fair to the Recorder to state tt
N he keeps up a sectional index which he is
/, required to do by law and also an alphebe
: cal index which is more difficult to keep tn
n regular index. However we do not appre
g of any allowance which is not in accordar
Id with the law.
IN The Probate Judge has for years been
r lowed 1915 for his services in criminal ca
ut which we consider extraordinary compen
e. tion for the work done. Comparatively
ne criminal cases are heard in Probate CoU
a. We think the Probate Jcdge is entitled
g the same fees as the Cl'k of Com. Pleas is
lit lowed in similar cases. and also what he is {
titled to for hearing cases before him. I
compensation, $500 for making out Go
,d missioners annual report is illegal and
~ Auditor had no right to accept the ga
If when paid out of county treasury. Un
4. section 1921 Revised Statutes of Ohio it
u, the duty of the Auditor to make out said
;, On port when requested 30 to do, as clerk
;s board of Commissioners. The Auditors
nd lowance of $250.60, for Dow tax work. is
oo of all ransom for the work actually perform