Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1900-01-24

Ia, 1894, No o. as follows:
No. 53, VIM. Alexander;..... S67 so
No. 81, A, ]. Glass, s,.................. 80 so
No. SIS. Thos. Hemm,.. 81 as
All on the Central Road Fund.
The two latter No. s4 and No. S. are
marked "no good and are mutlated and
left in the warrant book, but Nc. s. to
VIM. Alexander for S67 so is receipted
for as follows: "Wm. Alexander, per ID. |
S. Dent"
Both of the warrants to VIM. Alexander
for $o7 so have been paid and the county |
is ont So7 so by said transaction.
No 45 was issued by Mr., Barnett, No. |
s., by Mr.. Monteith.
Further. / find warrant No 26 on |
Road Fund, favor of Louis Oldag, road |
overseer, dated Jan. I9, 1898, for S33 to
have been drawn. Stub is marked |
"order" and warrant endorsed by III. X |
Barnett.
This may be in good faith but find no
authority for its issuance among the files
and records of the Office. This warrant
has been paid.
Further find OH commissioners
journal "D", page s5I an allowance to
+. O'Neill, on road district No. 2 fund
for Sr.so; OH page 3s2 an allowance to
T. O'Neil on the general road fund for
SI35 so these being based on claim
presented to the board for allowance.
| find that there were warrants drawn
to pay the same as follows:
No. II, dated April ~ 1891, for
district No. road fund for SIS 90
No. IA, dated April %, 1891, on
general road fund for....... so
| These were received by T.. O'Neil,
| The officer has gotten these items mixed
and the county is out 81 so as the war
rants have been paid
| further find that on page 353 Of COM
missioners Journal I'D" there appears au
item allowed to II. X. Barnett in the
sum of $40 which was changed to $47 so
by erasure and pencil, ,-endorsemen Of
allowance on bill shows it to have been
allowed in the sum of S43 being the
original amount of the bi l,--afterward
there appears addition to bill III the sum
Of "a SO and warrant was drawn for 47 so
Oh the General fund.
| | further find three bills of Geo. ID.
Barnard < Co one for SO cents, one for
S6I.2 and one for S63. .z5, making total
of $I24.25 There was deduction of $40
in the bill for S62.2s made by the com
nissioners, being allowed i'll the sum OF
I3 as. The allowance recorded in com
missioners journal "D'' page 4oS to Geo,
ID Bnnard & Co, has been altered to
read S24 IS, aud warrant No. 80, dated
April IS, 1898, for SI24 is was issued by
II. K. Barnett. The stub also shows an
alteration in the amount. Warrant was
not receipted for. II has been paid and
+ bears the endorsement of Geo. ID. Bar
nard & Co.
further find bill of Afford Bros. in
, the sum of s65 40 with a rebate OF 81 rs
. making the amount of the bill $o2 as
which was allowed in the sum OF S25.7o
. On page 47o of commissioners journal
"D" ] find there was an allowance re
corded i'll the sum of $2s.7o in favor o
S Afford Bros. but afterward changed tC
read sos 20 and warrant drawn for that
amount which warrant has been paid.
0 further find that there have been {
0 number of warrants issued for witness
. and jurors fees and mileage aggregatint
e Sies DO where l find names on til,
$ witness and jury record but find n'
II certificate of the clerk of the distric
e court Some warrants aggregatini
4 SSI75 tor which | do not find AN,
i certificate OF the clerk of the distric
court or other authority but which ap
c pear to have been received by the partie
e in whose favor drawn. There should b
r a certificate of the clerk of the distric
court or an order from the judge there
n of as a basis for warrants issued on nc
count Of district court expenses, If moi
/, the officer has, to say the least, bee
,r grossly careless or negligent III the pei
is Torrance OF his work even though thcr
!. may be no wrong intent.
|. | find pencilsd notations OIL the n
At cord and warrant stubs appearing I
NJ have been made for the purpose Of di,
# counting warrants. In this connectio
le | call your attention to sections 36S an
nt 65S4 of K S.
= During the administration of II. X
ID Barnett from Jan. 1891 to Jan. 1895 the'
ut appears TO have been no "Allowaut
m Book" kept, Spd I have found no cert
rs fed lists of inns that were furnishe
the county hsurer. There were all
-, warrants drawn enormously, whic
9, should have been afterwards cancells
~ but were not, and will furnish you Wi
~ ~. a list so that the same may be CANCEL,
:" and thus prevent any liability of the
oc being foated.
- great number of the warrants issu
"a during Mr.. Barnett's admlnistratio
e. aggregating many thousand dollars, a
-. based on records Of the commissions
rs court which have never beer signed
INC CHdlIlldli hNlSSttu Wy AiS w
io' ~, and, though most all warrants issu
, ~ prior TO 1895 have been paid or redeem,
~ ~ the question remains, Under such con
" tions. were these warrants legalf
aa The foregoing embodies my findings
~ matters pertaining to the issuance
"' county warrants during the administ
ton OF II X. Barnett as auditor. I
on following will pertain to the issuance
ted the warrants during the administI at
lex Of s. O Tannahill as county auditor fr
var January, 1895, to January, 1859
50, During this period also | find th
mani m have been many of the meetings OF
w" boards of county commissioners the r
ords of which are unsigned and un
I tested, and during the years Of 1897 Il
'"' 1898 none OF their minutes are signed
the chairman of the board. II is to
regretted that officers should he so incc
so petent as to keep or allow their reco
10 be kept in such manner The ell
of such carelessness is far-reaching an
50 almos, criminal. During all my exp
ence have never found such conditi
to exist. 1t not only raises the quest
Of the validity OF warrants which
! IS based on such unsigned minutes paw
the way for illegitiinate transactit
~ should any officer see fit to avail him
mel Of the opportunity, but all county b
atli MSS brought before the commission
=