The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1898-01-28
MILL SUE GORDON NEXT.
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY SAID To
BE PREPARING PAPERS.
Report Which Expert Dam Made Last
june show cd the Ex-County Clerk
TO BE In Debt to King County Al
most 5000 - Nhrt Hart Says.

In pursuance of the policy indicated by
the iiiing of civil suit against ex-sheriH
James II. woolery 10 recover an alleged
shortage. Prosecuting Attorney MeE.iroy
Is preparing 10 commence actions against
every cx-officlal Who Is accused Of being
sncr; in his accounts.
a Eumor concerning the proposed action
Of the prosecuting attorney was circu-
lated yesterday afternoon among local
politicians with special reference to ex-
County Clerk Thomas W Gordon A
Fosi-!ntesi.sencer reporter called at the
prosecuting attorneys office. Mr.. McEI-
roy .as not in. but Assistant Prosecuting
Attorney Hart on being asked II IL was
true that the office intended instituting
quit against Mr. Gordon replied:
Yes sir. Suit will DC Instituted against
all persons who are believed to be in
debt In the county" Mr. Hart practical
" admitted that papers in the case Of MIR.
Gordon were being prepared.
Expert Accountant g. T. Dam finished
work on ex-Iounty Clerk Gordon's books
last june and submitted a report to the
ehect that th@re was "a shortage OF 81
v1s.a. The Items making up the short
age were stated as follows: In civil cases
rot collected. s2.0ss.95: notariaI certificates
not Collected. $iAS; entries in book of lev
itS. slzblo marriage certificates ST. cit
izens papers. $40: admission To the bar,
40; Hing orders of fees. $3.50: copies Of
transcripts. sSi.50: due on registered de-
posts, N.st3ss, fees refunded in error.
siib9, miscellaneous errors 81 So-toial
Si.has 81 out OF this was subtracted q,
stated as errors in Mr.. Gordon's state
Menis. leaving the total amount due the
county. si.so3s1
Canrarnf+,xs eo.,.
L T. Dam offered the following report:
'on June :. 1895. Mr. Gordon reduced the
les OF netaTiAl certificate from 81 to %
cents j cannot understand what Induced
ar Sordon 10 make this change. as sec
lion ~. page 4ss. Of the laws of iSs9~g0 dis
tinctly specify that a fee Of 81 should be
charged for each notarial certificate This
law Was not repealed or amended In aay
eHgct oy the fee Law OF 1888
II lind from June :. 1853, and during the
balance Of his term he failed TO collect for
entering she rins sales in book OF ievies.
This Is an error on his part. as the law of
1899. under Miscellaneous Fees provides
q eaarge OF 20 c. nts for iadorsing sheriff's
sales or book OF leries
With the exception OF making an occa-
sionai cnarge OF appearance OF garnlshee
ana Tor very few garnshmcnt Judgments
no fees were collected in garnishment pro-
The decision OF the supreme court Sth
" ASH. ah. which merely held that 1t was
not necessary for plaintiff TO psy an addi-
proceeding was evidently construed by Mr.
Gordon To mean that no fte should be cob
lccted FOR any subsequent proceeding in
such cases. This * an error on his part"
The report concluded as follows:
In conclusion | viii say that during nv
examination l have found no evidence Of
: frsua under Air. Gordon's adminisg IA ton
Of the office. bat the carciessness shown in
the collection OF fees and the manner in
which he allowed the books and records to
be kept show incomnetency ana negligence.
The cash book. docket and records con-
tain many cT3SiIFes.
'ln keeping the books little attention was
paid "a dates of entries. there often being
= discrepancy OF many DAYS. sometimes AZ
several months. between the dates Of orig
inll entry in the record and the dates al
final entry in the cash book This. Of
course, rendered the checking Of the ar-
counts dou bly, difficult. ana mas materially
( heightened the time required 10 complete
the examination Respectfully submitted"
The suit win he one OF exceptional In
terest. "a Il will bring up all questions
concerning the fees charged by the coun-
~ el.rk, 1t was admitted ny the exam
iriny expert that ne dA not find evidences
OF fraud II appeared 20 Mr. Dam as if
Mr. Gordon had not followed the law In
the collection or money due the county
The insttutirg Of suit against Mr. Cor
don will result IN an official decision on
the points involved
Il IS said that the experts have been
unable 10 discover any inaccuracies in
ex-Sherim Van de N8nters accounts TIP
10 the present time. although they have
laborsd hard.