The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-01-23
TO SOMETHING THAT NOBODY
CAN EXPLAIN.
NEARBY GIVES 1T UP QUICK.
OTHER CITY OFFICIALS ARE IN
THE DARK ABOUT THE
MATTER.
WHERE DID THAT $50, 1000 COME IN
Was 1t the discovery That the Comp
trOIier Made One Night About
School Funds?

The Pioneer Press yesterday morn
ing in an editorial headed AN Eco
nCmical Showing endeavored to show
that the present Republican council
was not responsible for the increase
in the tax estimate budget this year
Of 500 600 more than the amount in 1896
To figure out this, the editorial stat
ed: 4sszs44@s--sssa
The official budget for 1896, as published
shows that only $150,0O0 was put in the tax
levy for the school fund. AS matter of fact
and record, the auditors books show that the
school taxes levied for that year amounted
stated in the budget
Not only did the official budget for
1896, as published show that $15O,O0O
was put in the tax budget for that
year, but the official resolution adopted
by the council in January, 1896, and ap-
proved by the mayor, Jan. II, 1896, read
as follows:
Assembly File No. 2577-That the amounts
OF money necessary to be raised by the tax
levy to be made in the year 1896 for carrying
on the business of the different departments
and funds of said city be and the same are
hereby designated as follows: School fund
$15O,OOO. And the city clerk is hereby in
structed to transmit to the county auditor of
Ramsey county copy of this resolution i'm
mediately after the approval of the same"
1t was supposed at the time by the
general public and all but a few of
the officials of the city that the sum
of $4,000 was the total amount to
be levied to support the schools in the
year 1896 AT the time the tax estimate
budget was discussed and adopted by
the conference committee and council
in January, 1896, Comptroller McCardy
made fight, and by the aid of we'll
prepared figures, which he presented,
convinced the members of the confer
NJ 10 hot
all the schools would need for the year
1926 was $150,000 in the estimate and
levy. The balance of the amount neces-
sary, the comptroller said, would be
received from various sources, and he
not only mentioned them, but gave fig
ures to bear out his assertions.
When the statement was made in
the editorial quoted above, that the
auditors books show that the school
taxes levied for that year amounted to
1922, 1853, or $50, 1859 more than the amount
stated in the budget" it created con-
siderable surprise. The members Of the
council and other officials about the
city hall yesterday said there must
have been some mistake, as the
amounts set apart for each Of the de-
partments in the tax estimate were al
ways the same in the tax levy which
is made in the October following the
adoption and passage of the budget in
January.
Deputy County Auditor Bourne. seen
yesterday SAID there was no mistake
in the figures, and there had been levied
in 1896 for school taxes 1922, 1859
The resolution adopted by the coun-
Gil in January, 1896, fixing the tax esti-
mate budget had been received at the
auditors office the day following it's ap-
prevail by the mayor. The amount in
the resolution to be levied for the
cnHn f11106 r., g
the same year, however, the levy pass
ed by the council was also filed with
the county auditor, and it provided
for levy Of two and half mills on
each dollar for school taxes The au~
ditOr's Office had nothing to do with
the matter in any way and simply fol,
lowed the instructions of the council
and levied two and a half mills for
the school fund. Now that his attention
had been called to it, the change made
by the levy passed in October, 1896, by
the council was over $50, 600 more than
the resolution passed by the council
in January, 1896, called for. This in,
crease he could not explain. Usually
the figures in the estimate for each
year agreed with the tax levy, but in
this case it didn't, and that was all
he knew about it.
Comptroller McCardy glanced at the
figures when they were laid before him
by a reporter for the G. ] o e and in
answer to the question of how 1t was
possible to place $150,000 in the tax esti-
mate in January and then levy for
$232, 796 in October, replied:
81 give it up"
Continuing, the comptroller said: Il
had nothing to do with those figures,
and don't know anything about them.'
Assistant City Attorney Phillips said
there might be some question raised
as to the IMPROPERLY Of putting $780,
600 in the tax estimate budget for a
fund for any one year and then Il few
months later levying for So, 900 more
than the sum mentioned, but In this
case 1t was perfectly legal. The char
ter provided under section chapter 6,
OF the special laws Of 1891, that the
levy for the support and maintenance