The oasis., 1901-06-22
ArAxpAyER WANTS TO KNOW.
Patagonia, Arizona, June l6 lsol' TO the Editor of THE OASIS:

valuable journal of June lst you say that "when you see bre akers ahead you are going to say so." That l infer to mean that you will point out any shortcomings by officials which may occur It seems to me that you are overlooking something of the Kind in ignoring the action of the board or supervisors tor it's inactionl in the matter of the recommendations Of the last grand jury with reference to the sherlff's office and the office Of the clerk of the board of supervisors.
 As understand it the grand jury reported to the court that there were grave Irregularities in both offices, and recommended the appointment of an expert to thoroughly investigate them and show just where the ire. gularities were located and who was responsible therefor. The court is said to have referred the matter back to the grand jury with the advice that 1t would be better for the board of supervisors to appoint such expert, because should frauds be found by an expert appointed by the court, the judge might be held to have disqual- i fled himself to try any indictments. So the grand jury recommended that the board appoint. l have heard Of no expert being appointed to do this work. Have you? If you have why don't yon say so? If you haven't why don't you demand the appointment of such an expert, so he may have time to prepare and present his report to the next grand jury, which will convene within a few weeks? l did hear that MT. R. D. George was appointed to expert the books, but he informed me that all he was employed to do was to balance up the books Of the Clerk of the Board, so the new clerk could have a base from which to begin business. 1 have heard said that when he commenced to go into cA-cutTlu DfOucllCh , liOOuoO oon NOi' ections he was told to stop. The tax payes who were. on the last grand jury and the tax payers throughout the county-wanted MT, George, or some other competent accountant, to go into the matter and report just what MT. Frederick and MT. Cumm ings did in their respective offices. They want some competent,mau to go to the records and say whether 1t is true that the county paid sixteen dollars each for books when there were on file bids to furnish them at ten dollars each, or thereabouts. They want to knuw if--as is rumored -ex.sheriff Brodrck issued license tax receipts in smaller amounts than the law requires, thereby defrauding the school fund of the county-and the education of our children-of the difference.
 There are two stories going the rounds about what Brodrick did. One story has it that he took licence re- ceipt books in which the amount printed was BIO and used them in issu- ing gambling licenses at S30 per month and saloon licenses at s75 per quarter, scratching out of the receipt the printed amount (sl0) and writing in the amount collected. But, so goes the story, he failed to alter the stubs, and accounted for only BIO in each instance where it ought to have been $50 or $75, pocketing the difference. Another story is that he did not raise the faces of the receipts, but issued sl0 receipts in lieu of receipts for the larger amounts, and that the license nayers were the benefciaries of the