The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-06-10

WFs$&h allowed tie BOOKS stEft geeggfs- 10
he kept ssao~ !Ieomfsase1ey and negi-
gence.
''rhe cash hook. docket and records con-
tain many eras4res.
In keeping the Books Istsle attention
Wa paid 10 dates Of entries. there often
being "a discrepancy 81 many days. aoTs3S~
times 81 several months. ees seen r1ss
dates ~ original entry In the record ard
This. % course rendered the checking OF
tsst accounts aogbiy difficult ard has n1a-
sesAasiy lengtnene1 the time required 20
eoHs1iste the examination Eesgsst !. ~
submitted, G. +. DAM "
Garaem'x Statement.
TIE county commissioners accorded ex-
County Clerk Gordon the courtesy of
CHANGING al the report in which person
aiiy he sg probably n1urs deeply concerned
than any body else. When he had finished
CHANGING through e. s post-iuteiiigenesr
reporter asked him whether he was pre-
pared 90 offer any comment on IL and al
though Dir Gordon was rather reluctant
20 say anything until he had had more
time 10 examine ihe report in detail, he
was not siow 10 condernn the report as
whole. and To give his reasons for so
daBg
with regard TO the report In it's general
conclusions. said Mr. Gordon. y may say
By way Or preface that | had ousy abo-G
thirty minutes this evening Ia which 10
what constitutes the purported shortage
in the civil cases. az | have not had ar
opportunity TO examine a single one OF
these cases since seeing the report; but
as 10 the notariai certificates. / must lie
permitted 10 call attention 10 the plain re-
ausrensnfs OF tho law and 10 say that
these are in diametr1eal opposition TO the
conclusions arrived AZ hy Mr. Dam. In
regard 10 these however / did not rely
IN urfs fg;s rYat }ttt ted he
prosecuting attorney. who advised me that
fifty cents wss all ! could charge on a
notaYfai certificate. This opinion he based
or the Session Laws OF 1873, chapter 10.
sections ! and 3. which plainly declare
that the fec for certificate and seal shall
be Fifty cents. and that All acts or parts
of acts in conflict with the provisions Of
this act are hereby repealed
II notice that MIR. Dam charges my ad-
mInlairatlon with esrelessness and In
competency. In reply to this charge I
dsfitfn 20 say that TIE bar and the general
nahlic are familiar with the conduct of
the office. and the men In my employ. /
had as ny chief clerk and bookkeeper
Mr.. r.. l.. Whtttemore. whom / honestly
believe TO have no superior as an account
ant II the Northwest. As my cashier the
man who collected aIl the fees In the civil
department.. ! had MIR. II. II. Smith. who
has been connected with the office for over
eight years He is thoroughly conversanr
with the law and the duties OF the office
and believe is az competent to Judge as
TO what are the legal fees 10 be collected in
the county clerks office as any man in the
state.
In the probate department 7 had Mr..
III. e. Gordon. a man who has made pro-
bate law q study, ard "a man whose work
IN hiS department has passed the critical
lnspe elton Of attorneys on both sides Of
Hiny important eases. and has met not
only their approval but that OF the distin-
gaished judge who presided for four years
IN that department of the superior court
As to the marriage certificates I may
say first of all that IL Expert Dam had
h.cn vigilant as the general tone of his
report indicates. he would have found
technical deficit far exceeding that which
he has reported And vet | am free 10
say at the same time that not one dollar
o. al this apparent deficit failed TO rsa h
the county treasury. The plain and sim
pie fact is that many Of the fees for MAJ
rage certificates went through the au-
ditors office instead Of the clerks Office.
Indeed. when 7 entered the clerks office
found that M predecessor had never
received single dollar for recording
marriage certificate That money was
collected by the county auditor and by
him turned into the county treasury
Some time after | went into Office I con-
clnded that was entitled under the law
10 81 of the s. collected by the auditor on
each marriage certificate. Accordingly
! made "a demand on the auditor and re-
ceived from him 81 for each marriage GER
tifeate. and I am safe IN saying that this
amount constituted the first receipts so
far as knew, ever paid into the county
clerks Office from marriage certificates.
with regard 10 the other items on the
report. they rest on the same basis rs the
civil cases. and as have not had an
opportunity 10 examine the individual
cases on which they are based | am not
prepared 20 offer any comment on them.
LamentmbIe Ignorance.
In regard TO the alleged deficit Of ssas 10
for entering sherlns sales on book OF
lcvles with all due r1odesty | may FAY
that Air Dam has here exhibited the same
lamentahle ignorance displayed In some
~ rho other items oe his report. The fact
IL that tn assessing and collecting the
fees on such sales | was governed strictly
hs section ? chapter 40 laws of iSga
which stipulates "rhc fees prescribed in
this section SHALL be- in eull for all ser
vices performed by the clerk Of the So
psgior court in the progress OF civil nc
ticus and proceedings other than pro-
bate causes from the beginning thereof
Down TO and including the entry. colIec-
tom and satisfaction Of final Judgment
therein and including all proceedings In
open Court and MI entries. filings and
recording therein
As 10 the dlctatorlal assertion of Mr..
l4am that my construction of the supreme
cof:rt decision with reference 70 fees n
garui~NmEut cases was an error. pass
IS she fact that his language il that OF a
supreme court judge rather than that OF
au expert accountant and ara perfectly
willing TO pat Nv cwu construction " the
law hy the si3C OF HIS have kept books
several years myself. and for the Hrst
time sr nv hfc ] have learned THAT II IS
Within the proyiace ~ an expert 20 con-
.tyse the law rather thsu Is expert the
books
AT the expiration ~ my frsi term of
Office" satA Ny Gordon "l demanded Il
;he county commissioners t5at ny books
hs exported fu compliance Ntfh tbiS de-
fuanl they employed D man who VAS In
no W So friendly ~ me. from the faoJ ihat
I hs3 oyen Obliged - dispense Win hts
Scrx iceS when Z weBt intc office. buj VINO
VS. thoroughly competent fs "a thorough
hoakkecNer. ana wNe hea served several
Sears ia go eountN clerks office and Vas
thsrefot> f}.i3v acquainted Wtth al It's legal
ant technical regluee1ar.<. The resu}1 =
trts iu<es 'E-attaa Was lae following Ger
lsgcate.
.' -Tv,l~ fs "a --r..ry fhas tha books ana
scr9ur.~ 80 Tho~sss W ttsrio0 rOuury
cisrA "t Nta& r5N Hff. ~ tsA.. b.sVo b1en
examined .os fae period comm actnE Jan
aArv - Uses ans tottaE January a. fS.ss
by E~pevts 81 w EpW--u sud w : fIsnks
4r3 sAat kttrn rfNaT1 waS accepted hy tAs
noeet NJ eaaotS ceclwis>tostsvs ana elaG
/ ,o &c o-ttca az iee coaU,> saai'er on Apru
-S79* ra7e~t ssoys thst ar f1-,4s ana
! tFv~ rs-vtsft Ha<r 3sseH tc,-3ese3 for and
| lhas t6e cso.snts OF @7ta Ie0nas ". Cor
] SAss eflgHty- clerk for tWe ra5s.zY ahax,ss