The San Francisco call., 1897-03-16
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT.
SACRAMENTO. Cal. March IL. 1897.

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, [
SACRAMENTO, Cal, March 13, 1871
Hon. John II. Dickinson, Chairman Inuestigdt-
ING Committee, Etc. Sacramento, Cdl-DEAR SIR:
Since answering your letter of March l have
received another letter from your committee
of date March 9, to which at this, the earliest
possible moment, nope you will permit me
to reply. In this letter, which requests from
me certain evidence, and requests my coop
Grafton in the investigation now in progress
before you, you recite that you have discoy-
cred DO "evidence tending in any way to sup
port the charges" which 1 have made against
the Superintendent of State Printing in my
veto message of February 9 last. l am sur
prised that you should regard the evidence
already in your possession so lightly. and in
this connection would call certain facts TO
your attention.
l complained in my veto message that Sec
ton 531 of the Political Code requires the
superintendent to make a report to the Gov
ernor embracing record of the eomplet te
transactions OF his Office" (which report shall
show in detail all the items of expense at
tending the State printing, and all the ex-
penses of the Office" and that the superin-
tenoent had failed to make the report required
by that section. You have the report and you
have the law. Ordinari the TACT that the
report did not comply with the law might be
deemed some evidence tending in any way
to support the charges"
l complained that the superintendent pre-
seuted a payroll for labor performed for the
time from July to July Is, 1896 Attached
to this payroll was sworn statement that the
services were actually rendered ain the man.
ner and on the dates as above stated and that
the services herein mentioned were actually
rendered. Mr.. Johnston's foreman, Mr.
Thorp, has admitted, before your committee,
that the statements made in this affidavit
Mr. JOhnst0n'S affidavit
on file with the Controller, and the facts are
before you. This is some evidence.
l stated that Mr.. Johnston had failed to
make application to the Board of.Examiners
tor permission to incur deficiency, as he is
specifically required by law to do, ana trans
mitted with my veto a copy of his letters from
which the truth OF this statement appears. and
these letters are printed in the Assembly
Journal of February last.
l stated that his recent official report to me,
dated Septem ber 15 1896. shows that for the
fiscal year ending June 80, 1896, he had ex-
pended of the appropriation for the support
OF his Office $146, 600 50, or more than one
half of his appropriation, and in addition had
used stock on hand to the value OF 0S5 76,
making the total expenditure Tor the year
$15S, ,086 80, and that he claimed to have done
less than $95, 900 worth of work. Mr.. John
stons own report of that date is before you,
and on its face bears indisputabe evidence OF
the truth of this statement. This is more evi-
dence supporting my charges.
am informed that when Mr.. Johnston was
before your committee and was asked 10 eX-
plain this great discrepancy, he testified under
oath that his report TO the Governor was not
correct in its statement OF the amount OF
money used for the work and materials OF the
fortv-seventh fiscal year.
further understand that Mr.. Johnston tes-
tilted that he had expended OF the appropria-
tion made for the forty-seventh and forty
eighth fiscal years for Ia Dor done, N aterials
purchased anu indebted ness incurred during
the latter part of the forty-sixth fiscal year
about $28. 900.
1t is possible that your committee has over
looked the 1ull import of this admission. II
conclusively shows that the Superintendent OF
State Printing created deficiency during the
forty-sixth fiscal year, and endeavored TO iu-
cur an inde btedness i'll violation OF plain pro-
visions OF law. \ o provision OF our law is
more plainly expressed than this, that no Of
ncer IN the service OF the State shall have
power to create any deficiency in excess of any
appropriation OF money made by law" except
upon the unanimous written consent OF the
Governor. Attorney General and Secretary of
State, and any Indebtedness attempted in vio-
lation of this requirement "shall be absolutely
null and void" and shall not be "paid out OF
any State approprs tions"
When the superintendent of State Printing
used this sum of about SIS, 900 out OF the ap-
preparation specifically Tor the forty-seventh
and forty-eighth fiscal years to pay
xth fiscal year, in direct violation of
law, he caus ed a misappliance of the funds set
apart tor the the support OF his oftlce
fsca. years, paying out OF appro-
priation for that time debt unlawfully con-
tracted at previous time, and which the law
In express language provided should not be
paid out OF any State appropriations" When
you add to that in order 10 have accom-
plished this Mr.. Johnson must have M ade an
oath to the State Board or Examiners as to the
correctness OF the claims, and that they were
for work, labor and materials furnished and
done in the 47th fiscal year, you might be said
10 have some "evidence tending in any way
to support the charges
The records of the Controllers office will
show that Mr.. Johnston's claims did not state
that they were for Indebtedness incurred as
he stated in the forty-sxIh fiscal year. and
that il money was drawn for that purpose it
was without the knowledge of the Controller
and IN violation OF law. Iannex letter from
the Hon. E. p. Colgan, State Controller in
reply TO my inquiry into this question, which
is selfex planatory.
1t is useless to expect any conflict between
the Controllers figures and the Printers for
expenditures, as the former are based on The
sworn statements OF the latter.
Mr.. Johnston has frequently attempted TO
explain any irregularities which might have
sppe ared in the management OF his office by
saying that no money was drawn from his a D.
preparation except upon claims allowed by the
State Board of Examiners When 1t is recalled
that the only evidence before the board for lis
Information is the sworn statement of that
gentleman aud when you thus find that afi-
dav:ts OF this character and of the character of
the affidavit attached to the payroll of July i
TO July 18, 1896, are known to have been
made you will realize how little check there is
upon the expenditure of the vast sum bien-
nially appropriated for the support of the
State Printing Office.
Another statement made in nv veto mes
sage was that the State Board of Education
which, under the law and constitution has
the right 10 order prinsed the school text
books-made an order directing the Superiu-
tendent to print no more copies of a certain
grammar until the further order of the boa rd
This order was one which they had authority
10 make, and which it was the Superintend-
ent's duty te obey, and any responsibility
for its observance rested alone upon the Board
of Education. Mr. Johns ton admits to you that
he violated tn lis order of the authority which
the law and the constitution placed above him
and printed 10000 copies OF the forbidden
grammar, with the res ult that he has nearly
5000 copies hand aud unused
also charged that he had paid higher
price for coal than was necessary, and wnen
before your committee he testified he had paid
higher prices for coal than had been paid for
coal purchased under contract by other State
officers but that the reason he had done SO
was that the coal he purchased had create
Steam and power producing capacity than the
contract coal. The fact remains that the coal
which was being bought under contract at
less rate than he was paying brings e higher
price in the general market, and later, when
bids we're received for both varieties. the coal
for wi hich the superin tendent paying the
higher price was offered at a lower rate than
the other variety and both materially lower
than the cheaper variety.
! stated the circumstances attending the