The age-herald., 1898-03-18
THREE BAD REPORTS
 FROM MONROE Deceased Circuit Clerk Due the
 State $782.50. A FORMER HIGH SHERIFF Accused of Using Questionable Methods in Re- taining Prisoners to Increase Feed Bills Present Clerk Fails to Tax Up Bills.
A FORMER HIGH SHERIFF
Special to The Age-Herald.

 many officers in Monroe county, now on file in the governor s office, shows an ugly state of affairs to have existed in that county
 John w. Leslie, deceased, the former cir cult court clerk of Monroe, is due the state s7S250
 Examiner Purfoy finds that questionable methods pursued to retain prisoners in jail during the administration or former Sheriff I. B. Slaughter.
 In the books of Thomas J. Emmons, the present circuit clerk, the examiner finds that the clerk did not tax up and collect certain feed and removal bills on prisoners; did not pay into the state treasury certain solicitors fees, all of which taken to- gether foots up a nice figure.
 In regard to the books of the deceased clerk, the examiner says:
 "He has failed to account for and pay into the state treasury, in case of convic- tions where judgment was confessed, for the fine and cost, less sums in cases paid by him a second time, the sum of $7S25 Tabulated exhibits marked A, B and C are hereto attached.
 Exhibit A shows fees in cases where the clerks execution docket shows that the executions in the respective cases were fully satisfied of where no executions were Issued by the clerk. These fees aggregate.
 
 found by me to have been reported and paid twice by the clerk, aggregating $675O, leaving a balance on this statement of $457.50 due the state, on which there Is in- terest due for several years.
 Exhibit B is a statement of fees, amounting to $S2.50 in cases where the clerks execution docket shows that the executions were regularly issued, but in four of these no returns are shown to have been made by the sheriff, and in one re- turn showing part payment only. The affidavit of John s. Harrington, who was sheriff at that time, shows that unsatished execution in the four cases were turned over to his successor J. D. Foster, since died in September, 1892, eighteen months after they were issued. The clerks docket does not show the issue of alias executions.
 No Returns Made Up
 "Exhibit shows fees In cases of con- yiction at the spring term of the circuit court of 1S92 in which case executions for fine and costs were issued and no returns are shown to have been made by the sher- if. The affidavit of John S. Harrington, sheriff at the time the executions were ls- sued shows that such executions were turned over by him, uncolected, to ms successor, J. D. Foster, in September, suc- ceeding their issue in May.
 .'Exhibt D is statement of fees amount- ing to $75 in cases sentenced to hard labor
  obtain record or other evidence that Will enable me to determine the sum due the state in these cases have failed. John De- Loach, who, the records of the commls- sioners' court show, was hard labor agent for the county at the time these persons were sentenced and for an ample period after the expiration of their sentences, states that in but one case in that state nent has he ever collected anything. He does not inform me why he has not col lected anything
 q had him before me in person and fail- ed to elicit anything from him that could throw any light on fees in hard labor cases. Yet the records show that he was hard labor agent for the county from February, 1891, back, for more than two decades. His known intelligence and actions, while be- fore me, left me thoroughly impressed that he is in possession of facts that will throw light on these fees, but is unwilling to inn part it to me-"
 Retained on Doubtful Authority
 The examiner finds that questionable methods were pursued in holding prisoners in jail by I. B. Slaughter former sheriff of Monroe county. He says:
 While there was no evidence to show that collections out of the state treasury have been made for feeding prisoners not in jail for the time charged for in some in- stances, prisoners were committed and held under doubtful authority and questionable methods practiced to retain them In jail; that foes for feeding them might be cof- lected from tho state treasury To Illus trate: John Farr was committed to jail February 26, 1894, on the charge of grand larceny, and retained in Jail until April 27, 1895, fourteen months. When, after in- yestigation by the grand jury, and no bill of indictment being found, he was ordered to be discharged. There was a grand jury in session just year previous, and two months after the commitment to jail but his case seems not to have been investigat- ed by that body. The cost to the state for feeding these prisoners was $l25. On the 3rd day of May, after his discharge, he was recommitted on the charge of as- sault with intent to murder, and after re- maining in jail eighty-dve days at 0 cost of over s25 to the state for his feed, he was sentenced to hard labor for the coun- ty by tine county court The county court holds monthly terms by law, and may be opened for the trial of a case at any time.
 "Alien WanwTigltt was committed to jail January 5, 1884, on the charge of grand larceny. His caso was not presented and Investigated by the grand jury, which sat in t,c succeeding April. After the adjourn anent of the body an interested party was induced to make affidavit before the judge of probate, who issued a warrant of arrest upon which he was rctainef In jail. Up to the Issuing of this warrant the sheriff had no legal authority for holding him. Gfhe sun, paid for feeding him for this period is $S1 9, and as this sum was collected by
 
 should be required to refund it with inter- est added.
 Not Entitled toIt
 "Mr. Slaughter collected the sum of $4i70 from the state treasury on the Fist of Jnne, 1ss3, for removing Joe Slaughter from I5l- more county, which sum he was not legally entitled to. as there was no case pending against said Joe Slaughter in his county at the time of the removal, and he should be required to refund said sum with in ferest.
 "Ihe removal fee, amounting to S2s.5o, paid to MT. Slaughter on the 17th of July, js9s, for removing one Miles Jackson from Ccvngton county on an alleged indictment was collected by him when he was not le- galiy entitled to it, since the man Miles Jackson removed was not the Niles Jack- son under Indictment in Monroe county and he should be required to refund 1t with int crest added from the date of its pay nent. "The removal fee in the case of Jesse Gidjens. amounting to $3s.S5. paid by the nA k1n x.rfc.