The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-05-18

The report of Expert W. ]. Bateman
continued to be the topic of general
discussion yesterday. Achilles Perrin
was quite loud in his denunciation of
the document. His explanation OF the
part rejecting on his transactions
when probate judge is explained by
him about in this wav: There was q
mark on the bills made out by him sig
nifying etc" of which the expert took
no notice. Thus his claim for "SI for
writing letter for pass for poor" should
have read ''s4 for writing pass for
poor, etc" While this does not itemize
the report according TO law, it sugges Is
that other services We're performed and
charged for
Mr.: Ledwidge, as appears elsewhere.
VIII look over the report with a view to
ascertaining if he really has made the
errors attributed to him and to settling
Whatever shortage may exist
Mr.. Boyle said, speaking of the tax
sale redemptions, that the statement in
the report TO the effect that the fund
was treated as a private fund, was in
correct; that at no time had he dollar
of this account in his private account
There were a great many buyers of
tax sale certificates besides Weber
county, and as II was impossible for
me TO tell what tax sales the county
held, having no lists whatever of them,
the only thing 1 could do was to estab-
llsn redemption fund, which I did.
Upon a piece of property being re-
deemed I Immediately entered ii on
my REDEMPTION book, and credited the
property With the amount of the re-
demption. Whenever a tax sale certiii-
cate was presented to me, if the prop
erty had been redeemed, l immediately
paid him the amount due. taking Up
the certificate as a receipt This was
done in all cases, whether the holder of
the certificate was the county, a cor
poration or an individual.
In regard to the treasurer's fee of
% cents for issuing redemption GER
tificates. which the report claims was
enormously held by me, L viii say that
think that it properly belongs TO me,
but If, on investigation. It shall develop
that l owe the county $3.50. or any
other sum, I am willing and able to
pay it.
In regard to the overdraft of 81. 931,
Dec. 81. 1894 the report saws warrants
were at a discount and the countv's
credit deprecated, yet there was money
in the redemption fund
Mr.. Bowie said that while the state
ment about the oveTdraft was true, still
the treasurer paid every warrant pre-
sented during the entire year; there
fore that the county's credit had de-
preciated or that warrants were at a
discount is not true. Furthermore the
county paid no interest on overdrafts
during the year. as there was money in
the general fund all the time unless
possibly, few days in the latter part
of the wear.
The warrants appearing as drawn in
favor OF the Ogden State bank for
1889. IS and s27.96. were. the result of an
arrangement made between Mr.. Wade
representing the county. and Mr. Bige-
low. representing the bank. whereby
the bank cashed about $4,000 worth Of
warrants held by different people.
These warrants were properly regis
tered and The bank simply drew the
per cent allowed by law.
This would seem to have been an ad-
vantageouS arrangement for the
county. as the county only paid interest
on the actual time the money was en-
ployed.
In explanation of Mr. Boyles state
ments it is urged by his friends that
he received only $40 month, and that
if his methods of bookkeeping fell
somewhat short Of Mr.. Batemal's ideal
system. it is but natural, considering
all the circumstances.
Mr.. Wade gave out an interview, TAX
ing UP the points wfereon ne was
criticised, answering some, denying
others and admitting some.