Phillipsburg herald. [volume] (Phillipsburg, Kan.) 1882-1905, 1895-10-17
oomparleone arc odIous.

purposes. For instance IN inc DtS-
patch Of Oct. 3, we fnd the following
"lwo OF the men nominated on that
| (populist) ticket have served the
county in the same positions for
which they are now candidates, and
after retiring from their offices were
each compelled to give their notes to
the county, the two aggregatng
nearly thousand dollars for fees
which they put in their pockets that
belonged to the county.
The present clerk l d Thornton
and treasurer Porter, will have no
such accounts to settle, il they should
stay in these offices the balance Of
their lives"
In the first place the amounts
should be, see expert Moore's re-
port @ p Barber, $161lO; j f
Arnold, $64926; total $50 36, instead
of 81, 900. 1--WE have memorandum
made by Mr.. Moore, which shows
that republican ex-clerk owed the
county $75 20 on the same account,
but never heard Of any note being
given for the amount).
The past history of Phillips county
is something that we do not care to
refer to, as we believe in letting the
old sores heal up, but when ex-of-
ficials are attacked in the way indi-
Gated above it seems but just to them
to show up some things that may
have been forgotten. The fees that
Mr.. Arnold and Mr.. Barber gave
their notes for were the same class Of
fees that county treasurers and clerks
have been drawing for years past
Along in the latter part Of 1893 the
supreme court decided that the fees
belonged to the county. The com
missioners of this county employed
Messrs Thornton and Kingery to
check up all officials who had drawn
fees during the previous three years,
and ascertain how much had been
collected. This investigation did not
differ materially from the one made
later on by Mr. Moore. 1t was found
that Mr. Arnold owed $649.26, and Mr.
Barber $16l 10, and for these amounts
the notes were given. These fees
have been collected and retained by
every treasurer and clerk for years
back, and for most of the time these
Offices we're filed by republicans
Can any one give the name Of any re-
publican official in this county who
ever turned back any Of the fees so
wrongfully collected? The populisl
clerk and democratic treasurer how
ever have made an effort to 10 so,
and have given their notes for such
fees. Gan any one find q note or any
entry on the county's books where
any republican ever turned back
those fees, if it can be done, will some
one show what the amount was9 In
justice to all these officials we wish to
say, that this practice prevailed all
over the state, and these officers sup
posed they were justly entitled to
them. The notes gwen by Mr.. Bar
Der and Mr.. Arnold are good aud can
be collected any day.
There are other ways in which Of
fcials may be expensive to tax pay
ers. Take the practice now in vogue
in the treasurers Office of registering
warrants, and figure up what the ex-
pense to the county is Say the reg
istered warrants average $4,000 for
the past and present year, the interest
alone on this amount is 81, 200 for the
two years. This the tax payer pays;
the discount on warrants is say at a
low figure ten per cent, or an other
two thousand dollars for the two
years. A total loss to tax payers and
creditors of the county OF $4,000
Mr. Barber over draws $l61 10, which
he agrees to pay back. Mr. Porter
costs the people $4,000, which is lost
to the masses of tax payers. Yes
comparisons are odious.
Now let US see what Mr. Thornton
has cost the county. That useless
investigation cost 5000, and did not
disclose any shortages. One day the
writer was in the clerks office and Mr.
Thornton told him that the county az
fairs we're in just awful shape, and
that the commissioners would do
nothing about it.
We suggested that if things were