The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-05-04


sum during the year. In these cases. as IN
the majority Of the above cases, the bills DO
not show who performed this duty, but II the;
50 was legal charge am satisfied that one
oficer frequently charges and receives several
81 In one day, which cannot be done, Wnere
law is recognized and obeyed. Furthermore,
If the sheriff is entitled to receive lees LOT tne
performance Of duties in the municipal court,
and he does sometimes serve papers OUTSIDE
of the city and charges sherifs fees there
for, the law which created said court says
that the court in allowing fees for such serv-
Ice as mentioned, shall allow and tax the
same fees which are allowed in Justice courts
to constabes for the same service, whlch Is
in accordance with the general law, which
provides that the fees mentioned IN section
$500, Statutes of 1894 (the fees Of constables),
and which are allowed in justice courts,
shall be allowed to the sheriff OF any olner
person performing the duties OF constable.
Fifth-The sheriff has been charging anu
has received from the county ~ 1or every
prisoner committed to the work house-1or
81, and officers per diem 49, total w. inc
present sheriff charges but $6 FOR the same
service The reduction is in the conveyan nc;
fee, 81. l found in looking over the pilis
that the name of the officer who performs
this service is sometimes given. In one piil
the last item charged was dated the 18th,
the next was dated the 18th, and was Ior
committing person dd to the Tbe next
was dated the 18th, and was hor
another person by the same deputy. IN eX-
aiming the record Of the court Iouno
that these two persons were committed on
the same day and were received by tne Of
fcer on the same day and at the same tlIhe,
and no doubt We're committed to the VOTE
house on the same day. for when tne she III
received the snug little sum of $l4, or $lz.
The fee which he should have received under
the special law referred to is 80 cents LOT
committing and S cents per mile trayeieo
in going and returning, which WOULD haraiy
amount to 81 for every person commltted.
Sixth-In committing persons TO the state
schools at Red Wing, Faribault and owa.
receiving for Officers per diem," two days,
Sc; for going to either place and returning
when it only takes one day. They also
charge and receive for hotel .. expenses s.e hu a.
one meal at either place; that is, II
is very easy to go to either place in one
day and return, and in doing 30 one can
have but one meal at either place. The
same is true in going to st. Peter. These
overcharges amount to considerable IN the
course Of year.
Seventh-The sheriff IN making return on
personal properly tax warrants not collected
charges his usual fee of 80 cents per copy
besides 81 for his return and mileage This
80 cents per copy" is illegal and for services
find anything upon which to levy, and cannot
distrain sny goods or chattels belonging to
the person charged with such taxes.
The former sheriff has been In the habit OF
charging railroad fare for prisoners arrested
on warrant. The chage is illegal and there
is no warrant for the same His fee for arrest
iEg a person a warrant is 81 for the arrest
and mileage at cents per mile, and why ne
should charge for conveying a prisoner on
the railroad any more than when conveyed by
any other means does not appear from his
bills. He also charges for going to Chicago,
Kansas City and towns in Wisconsin and other
states with warrants. Following is sample
of the charges under this head:
State VS.. A. J. Bay, warrant municipal
court, not found. Observation-Disclosures. 81 %
One railway fare to Chicago .......... II so
One railway fare returning. .............. II 30
sleeper, going ....... ................... w
Sleeper, returning :....:... ............. %
Hotel at Chicago, four days. ............. 90
Per diem OF officer OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES. II 90
Dec. %, State vs. James Johnson, warrant
district court, not found
Railway fare to Kansas City. ............$16 Al
returning ........................ 10 a
Sleeper, going. NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. 90
Hotel at Kansas City, four days. ........ 90
Per diem officer. four days. II 90
In the first bill he charges 81 for serving
warrant, when he did not serve 1t. The
sheriff of Hennepin county or his deputies
have more business in Chicago or Kansas
that county than have, and he does not have
any more authority to serve papers in those
states than 1 have. These charges are Of
quite frequent occurrence. There are never
any vouchers accompanying such bills, and
they never disclose the name Of the officer
who is performing this kind Of service for
the county. 1 might add right here that
persons who advance money for the county
are hardly ever required to produce or show
proper vouchers therefor. This ordinary
business method and precaution observed in
all business transactions by ordinary business
men, is generally ignored in Hennepin county
l saw the following charges by the same Off
GER: To be paid George Dahl for procuring
evidence in liquor cases, SIS; Henry Auerbach
same $25; to be paid Frank Dennis for watch
ing dam at Minnetonka Mills, $3.50; paid
Henry Auerbach for procuring evidence in
liquor cases, S.; G. G. Dahl, same 20; G. G.
s ST. SAlns '10'''' f''A' ANel 'A'A sN'
If these men had legal right against the
county 1t was their right and business to
county board, that they and the taxpayers of
Hennepin county might know what services
they had performed to- entitle them to this
money so generously advanced by the officer
mentioned. The officer had no business to
advance this money and should not have been
paid or reimbursed. If men want to do bust
ness in this loose way and ignore the law
which requires an ttemized bill, let them
take the consequences.
NINTH am satisfied that in summoning
the petit and grand juries; in subpoenaing
witnesses for the grand jury and in the dis
trict court, unnecessary mileage, or mileage
that is travelled or to be Travelled, Is charged.
am led to believe this from the fact that
the sheriff has neglected and refused to item
ize his bills for such service as required by
law They do not show where service is made,
or how and where he travels to make the
amount or number charged, and In many
cases in subpoenaing witnesses the number of
miles for each witness is not given The
name of the officer is not given. In bringing
up prisoners to the municipal court he charges
two miles for each prisoner. He often brings
up several In one day, and charges the two
miles for each, when he will not travel two
miles for the entire number The same is
true in trying to collect personal property
taxes, the sheriff failing to make an itemized
statement showing as to where he has gone
or how far.
Tenth am also satisfied that if it were
possible to trace the work of the sheriff and
his deputies and ascertain the number of
days actually served and for which they draw
pay in attending court and other duties 1t would
be found that charges are made for more days
than are served in some cases, and others are
abe to draw pay for several days when they
work but one. If all bills were itemized and
dated as they should be, this could not be
done. 1t is Claimed that the deputies who are
appointed to attend court can draw during the
term for days when court is not in session.
In other words they draw pay for every day
of the term. and not for the days actually
served. / claim that If the court adjourns at
noon until the next morning, or II 1t adjourns
Thursday night to Saturday morning, the Of
fcer cannot draw pay for the half day or for
Friday, because his pay his fixed by the day,
and not by the week or the term. and that 1t
is not possible for the sheriff to get some
thing for nothing any more than 1t is for any
one else and section 5,5S5, Statutes Of 1894,
forbids any officer to receive fee or COM
pensation for any service unless the service
has been actually performed. 1t has been the
practice in this county for the clerk to draw
his certificate to the sheriff for his per diem
and that of his deputies at the end of each
week when the court is in session without