Barbour County index. [volume] (Medicine Lodge, Kan.) 1880-current, 1898-02-09
THE INCARCERATION LIBEL SUIT.
A Statement Of Facts Showing Reasons Why
1t was Instituted.

hay-1IamlltOn libel sui which was
hotly fought issue in the January term
OF the district court of Harper county.
Our reason for the delay Is explained
from the fact that we were not sufici-
led to the difficulty nor the manner of
procedure while the case was on trial.
We have letters from prominent cltl-
zens of Harper county, men of uDques-
toned integrity, and In view of every
thing connected with the trial it is not
wonderful that it resulted as it did. 1t
is not always that the ends of justice
are attained and there are frequent in
stances where cases of this kind are
made difficult and erroneous decisions
rendered on account of partisan pol
Itics.
But be that as 1t may, We are pleased
to give our readers the facts. Judge
Nc Kay has kindly submitted to an in
tervlew which we publish verbatim.
He says:
Frank Hamilton was elected county
clerk of Harper county in 1895 on the
populist ticket. About year after he
took his office, it came to my ears that
he was not accounting for the fees of
his office according to law. AS we
had accused former county officials
of that wrong doing, and feeling
deep interest in my own county, de-
termined to investigate, and asked the
county attorney about 1t and if Hamil-
ton was advised as to the law. Under
the law the salary of the county clerk
of Harper county is $1,000 per year In
full for all services whatsoever. Upon
investigation l found that he had
drawn during his first veal between
$1,000 and $1700, over S40G of which was
an illegal allowance by the Board of
County Commissioners. The law pro-
videS that the county clerk shall keep
fee book and that the same shall be
balanced at the end OF every month,
showing the amount of fees received by
each quarter the clerk shall make de-
tailed statement under oath to the
Board of County Commissioners of the
amount of fees received by him for
the preceding quarter and the same
shall be deducted from the salary of
the county clerk, and upon the failure
of the county clerk to make the said
statement under oath, he is liable to a
forfeiture of $40 per day for every day
that he shall fail to make such state
ment. And the county commissioners
are liable to fine of 500 each for al
lowing the salary Of the county clerk
before such clerk has made his state
ment of fees and before the same is de-
Quoted from the salary allowed by law
to the clerk.
ITO my surprise the county attorney
told me that Hamilton had asked for
and he had rendered written opinion
the first month Hamilton was in office in
which he advised him that all fees of
the county clerks Office belonged to the
county and showed me a letter press
copy of said opinion. Deeming it my
duty to so do, l one day in January, '97,
called Hamilton out of his office, spoke
to him about what had heard regard
ing his keeping fees belonging to the
county and told him it would not do
and must be stopped. l think the board
Of commissioners we're in session at
the time. A few days later Hamilton
came to me on the streets of Anthony
and told me that the matter had been
Strengthened up, or words to that eff
feet. and retorted that was glad that
such was the case.
"SOme months after, about July, Mr..
Hamilton came to my house and told
me that the county attorney had been
in his Office and made copies of all of
hist Hamilton s)youchers for salary ETC.;
that he feared the county attorney was
going to make trouble for him about the
fees of his office; that he desired me to
get the county attorneys copies and
bring to his Office for comparison to
see if they were correct that if he had
retained any fees belonging to county
he had done so in ignorance of the law
and without bad intent that if trouble
was in prospect that he had better not
be candidate for reelection, possibly,
and some further talk. Senator Titus
was present and heard the conversation.
| agreed with Mr.. Hamilton = even to
his not being candidate for re- election.
Shortly after went to the county
attorney, secured voucher copies and
made the comparison as requested. l
found that Mr.. Hamilton, during his
first year in Office, had not accounted
for the fees of his Office quarterly, as
provided by law, and had not deducted
them from his salary, but each quarter
had drawn his salary in full until jan
uary, 1897. At the January meeting of
the county commissioners he had three
vouchers allowed as follows:
Zone under date of Jan 9Th, 1897, for
salary. for $320.79. On the same date
was issued warrant for the amount
However the said warrant had Can
celled" written across its face, at lat
er date.
Zone under date of Jan. 9th, 1897, for
salary, for $32O.79, was credited by
fees collected S32O.79." Making the &C.
counts a standoff.
lone under date of Jan. 9th, 1897, for
keeping daily balances $500 co., This