The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-09-01
LIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES.

Throughout twenty years or over OF
Democratic administration of the tman-
ciai offices of this city and county there
has not been shown in any single oe-
partment anything like the disgracefully
loose and discreditable state of things
which is now concededly in existence IN
the county treasurers and county audl-
tors Offices In the latter case the heaa
CT the Office has felt called on to dispense
with the services of his chief deputy
Tha county treasurer has thus far as
sumed to bear the burden of his troubles
alone. His deputy seems to have a SUI
ficiently secure hold on his confidence,
Notwithstanding all the happenings OF the
immediate past, not to be lightly. dis
posed of in a period of public criticism,
which, Of course will soon blow past
But, while County Treasurer Arosin is
maintaining his serene silence on the pre-
vailing scandals, the requirement of the
law, that he shall exercise all proper
care in the dispensation of the public
funds, remains in existence. If the draw
ing of the warrant by Deputy Bourne
in that tax certificate case warranted
the removal of that official by his SUI
perior what can be said Of the action
of the county treasurer's Office in paying
out the money on that and other war;
rants without having taken intelligent
pains, at least to see that the payments
were warranted by law?
Tn the columns of the G o e have
been reproduced the provisions of the
law which place the burden on the county
treasurer of being satisfied that the law
warrants any payment before it is made.
This is not only the law, but it is the
common sense and the common honesty
Of the situation Was County Treasurer
Arosin satisfied that he was authorized
by the law to pay that warrant of Dene-
gre? How did he satisfy himself? What
knowledge did he have Of the transaction
that he did not derive from the face OF
that warrant? And, if he had any such
knowledge, what was the character of it?
1t does not seem possible that he re-
CARDS himself as a mere official dummy
to the county auditor If he does not, he
could not have signed such a warrant
innocently and tgnorantly.
Even the simple requirement, which
it ought to require no law to make in
dispensable on the part of financial Of
fetal, that the act or resolution under
which the money was to be paid should be
specified on the face of the warrant seems
not to have been complied with. So
that it would seem that the office of
county treasurer is regarded by it's in
cumbent as a mere ministerial place, in
which money is to be paid out on an
auditors warrant as hand-bills might be
distributed by him, without care and
without inquiry. Or else, the conclusion
is inevitable that the county treasurer, or
one or more of his assistants has a
very convenient faculty for dispensing
with bothersome details when they are
liable to infict inconvenience or worse
on other people. From every point Of
view of the transactions thus far reveal
ed through the bank examiner it is quite
plain that the finances Of this county
might easily be administered by other
officials far more competent and reliable
than those who are now in charge of
them.