The age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1897-1902, 1897-08-31


Mobile and Ohio railroad. state taxes for
1884. the sum of S5,s35.62. In July, 1885.
this amount was not charged on the cash
book nor included in his report to the
auditor or his payments to the treasurer.
On his attention being called to 1t, he
paid 1t into the treasury.
In the matter of poll tax. in 1881, the
amount assessed was s12,532.50. and the
amount collected was $4644. On his err
ror and isolvency there was allowed him
S7S79.5 so.
In 1882. out of s1Os12.5O assessed polls,
he collected only $4.047.
In 1888 the assessment was $40, $50, and
the collections only 50, 1850
On April 6, 1886, Examiner Lapsley
filed another report on Mr.. Lott, having
been ordered by the governor to CONF
plete the examination. At that date
there were still due and unpaid by Mr..
Lott on errors disclosed in the former
report $915.S7.
In the, fall of last year Governor oates
ordered the state examiner Col, Reeves,
to make an examination of the county
offices of Mobile, ard on Dec. II, 1895, ne
filed his report. His examination OF Cor
lector Lofts Office covered the years 1871
to 1895. inclusive. The amount of de-
fault for those years and then due the
state was 50. 595.S2 not including interest
This records in the governors FiHlce
show that on Dec. 2, 1885, the clerk OF tdle
city court OF Mobile certified to the, pre-
bate Judge ul.alt the grand jury at the
November tsrm of the city court in their
report stated that the bond of the county
tax collector was insufficient and recon-
rnerdiei1 that ne be TeuuT; to give ad-
dtionai security in the sum of $4,000
On the same day The probate judge
cited Mr. Lett to appear on Dec. II and
show cause why he should not fricreaSe
his bond as required by the rscommenda-
ton of the gplnd jury.
On the 18th day of December Mr.. Lott
appeared aDi asked for further time IN
which to file said additional bond, and
was given until Jan. 7, 1897.
On Jan. he asked for still further time
and was given til Jan. 16, and just before
that date ne filed a bond for $4,000,
which was approved by the probate
judge.
In March one of the sureties on the $780,
900 bond asked to be discharged, and Mr..
Lott had to give a new bond, and gave
several sn1aM ones, making $4,000 in all.
The probate Judge approved the new
bonds ard the attorney-ge general says they
are not a legal bond
thus appears from ,he=e various sui s,
compromises and reports eff examiners,
that during the hast twenty-ihree years
Mr. Lott has been in dslaault for greater
or less amount for each CT the following
years: 1873, 1874 1875. 1876, 1877. 1873, 1879,
1880, 1881 1882, 1883. 1884, 1885 1887 to 1895.
Every time MT. Ie.bs Office Ens besn
examined he has been found ITO be in
default. Every time he has been sued
judgment has been pronounced against
him. The monies paid out by the state
and county to examiners and attorna VS.
in Eeg-irg from Mr.. Lott and his sure,ies
money that he had TaMed to pay over ac-
cording to law would purchase the b5st
plantation in Alabama.
The very last performance by one of his
own securities. a man who went on his
bond in January makes oath within about
ninety days that he is in danger of bling
made liable and can have no adequate
remedy against Mr.. Lott. From all this
record Is there any man, however par
tisan, who would say that Gov. Johnston
should not give diligent attention to at
least seeirg that Mr.. Lott has a good,
sufficient and legal bond to cover any
judgments that may possibly be hereaf-
ter rendered against him.