The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1898-01-06

But II some of the grand jury experts
i mad not stumbled upon this leakage 1t
would have gone on unchecked until the
end of Mr.. Hodgman's term.
An inspection Of the county auditors
books shows nowhere that the county re-
corder obtained a permit from him to
pay the sum of 1851. 40 into the treasury,
but on the 3rd inst Hodgman paid In
$34S9.80. which is given as the total OF
his fee book for the month OF December,
and this may include that sum.
The Herald was reliably informed that
when Major Donnell found that his
"opinion" was not the grand jury's opin-
ion, he, as usual, crawfished.
Before it struck Mr.. Hodgman that he
ought to get the money for recording
mining location notices, he charged only
fifty cents apiece for doing so, but when
he had become satisfied that the money
should go to himself he increased the
price to 81, and even more. Now. this is
a very steep price, considering that To-
cation notices hardly exceed two folios.
C. c. Grove, of the Pacific Coast Abb
stract bureau, in the Bullard block, had
a story to tell which reflects seriously
upon the business methods of Mr.. Hodg-
man.
II fled" he said. Gin the recorders Of
flee in July last five mining locations.
On the LIST of August I sent my clerk to
the Office to get certified copies of these
records to file in a suit that was to come
up for trial the next day in the superior
court. He reported that my notices were
not indexed in any index whatever. nor
did they appear on the fee book. The
deputy recorder at the desk insisted that
the notices had been recorded in the
book called Mining Claims" instead of,
as heretofore. Miscellaneous Records
But, for all that, they were not found,
because they were neither in the one
book nor in the other.
After a long search we found my
originals in Hodgman's private office,
stuck away in case, neither recorded
nor indexed, nor entered on the fee book
When finally got my certified copies 1t
was too late to use them in the suit in
court.
I'm August filed couple more no.
tees. That time the recorder charged
me 81 apiece for them. Before that the
charge had been only fifty cents. OF
course, 1 kicked against the overcharge,
but Hodgman insisted that was mis-
taken; that I had paid 81 at all times.
But you can see the notices here for
yourself. and the amount on them
| charged by the recorder. That is
marked so cents plainly enough, 1t is
not? Well, that time I asked him for
receipts for my money, and he gave them
to me, each showing that had paid 81.
1.-THE same thing happened again.
We had a necessity for these two no.
tees later on, and they could not be
traced on the fee book. They were not
| indsxed either. I tell you that things
are in a very mixed-up condition in the
recorders office. Until the grand jury
made Hodgman return the money he had
held out mining notices were not pub
lished in the Court Journal. Now they
are, and yesterday there were no less
| than twelve.
while upon the subject Of the mixed
up condition Of things in the recorders
office, want to say that the recorder
di not himself sign the certificate, at
the bottom of each notice, showing that
the same had been recorded; but the
name Of e. c. Hodgman has been writ
ten there by some one else. These GER
tificates should be signed by E. C. Hodg-
man himself as county recorder, or by
E. c. Hodgman, county recorder, pei
-, deputy. AS recorded now they are
not legally recorded, and in case Of liti-
cation these notices would be knocked
out higher than kite"