The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1902-11-27

Section 917 show in detail the trans
actions of the Infirmary Directors.
We further find that some Of the !
County officials have presented to sthe |
Commissioners bills for Post Office |
rent, which bills have been allowed /
and paid by said Commissioners,
without authority of law.
We tfurher find that some of the |
County officials have been extrava-
CANT in their purchases of supplies
and materials for their respective
offices and the Commissioners have
been equally as extravagant in their
allowance of bills for the same.
We would suggest to the County
Commissioners that County officials
may with their permission order ma
terials and supplies for their respec-
tive officers, but they cannot fix the
price for the same, and that it is duty
of the Commissioners when u bill is
presented for supplies furnished Coun-
ty officers to examine the same and
allow only reasonable compensation
for the same.
In item 1856 in the County funds,
the Sheriff of this County received
from the County Treasury Two Dol
lars ($2.00) for boarding a prisoner
ClldlRtu Wlbll uSbGIUluR bub
which is q crime under the Federal
Statutes and not under the laws of
Ohio, and, therefore, said amount
should have been paid by the Federal
authorities and not by Hooking Coun-
ty.
The vouchers for item 278 in the
County funds show that the Auditor
of this County received Fifty eight
Dollars 1865. 00) for appraising rail-
roads for the year, 1902. We think
this amount excessive. Under Section
2775, each County Auditor lis lalIow-
ed the sum of Three Dollars ($3. 00)
per day as member of the Board
of Assessors and Appraisers of Rail-
way Companies, and Five Gents n
mile going to and returning from it's
place of meeting. The claim for these
services, under Section 1877, Revised
Statutes of Ohio, like all other claims
for services rendered by County Au-
ditors, should be made out in detail.
Another voucher IN said item 27S
shows that the Auditor was allowed
the sum of Twelve Dollasr and Twen-
ty cents (S12.20) for indexing the
Commissioners Journal. 1t has been
held by the Attorney General Of this
State that County Auditors arc not
entitled to pay for indexing the Corr
mlssioners' Journal, but that the d. :
il cast upon them by virtue of being
the clerk of the Board of Commits
sioners and the compensation there.
fore is included in their general sal
ary. A number of other items In said
report show payments to said Auditor
for similar services.
We further find that said Auditor
was allowed clerk hire for several
months within the year, but we shave
been unable to find any authority of
law for the allowance and payment
of the same.
Item so in said report shows that
that The Ohio Democrat received
Forty-two Dollars and Ninety Cents
(S42. 90) for publishing Sheriff's Pro-
claination at half rates for the year,
1901.
Item 42 in said report shows that
the Sentinel received the same
amount for similar services. and
item 43 shows that ssThe journal Ga
zette received for publishing Sheriff's
Proclamation for said year the sum
of Eighty-fiv Dollars and eighty
cents 1885. 80.) These amounts were
paid to said newspapers for publish
ing said proclamation for the period
of five weeks. BY reference to Suc-
tion 291i, Revised Statutes of Ohio,
it is apparent that the law requires
said proclamation to be published but
once. We, therefore, find that pay
ment of said newspapers for the pub
lication of said proclamation more
times than one is sillegal;, that the
same should be published but once
and paid for for one Sweek's tpublioa-
tion only,
BRIDGE FUND.
Item 29 of the bridge fund shows
payment of Forty Dollars and Thirty
four cents ($40. 34) to Henry Trimm er
for The Bellefountaine Bridge COM
pany. The voucher does not show
formed services for, or furnished sup
plies to, the Bellefountine Bridge
company, that company should nave
paid Mr.. Trimmer, and Mr.. THINNER
was not entitled to draw said amount
form the amount from the County
Treasury.
ROAD FUND.
The voucher for item 4 in this fund
does not show when the work was
done. The voucher for item 13 in
this fund shows amount due each of
eight different persons for labor ON
road in Green Township, but does
not show how much labor was per-
formed by each person. The report
does not name lany of the parties,
except Henry Davis,
The voucher for item II in said
fund shows amount due James Davis
for surveying change of road. but
does not show what road or how
many days he was engaged in said
services.
SHEEP FUND.
There are several discrepancies be-
tween amounts allowed and paid
various parties out of this fund as
shown by the vouchers therefor and
this report, as for instance, item 1O6
of the report shows amount paid
William H. Funk, for sheep killed,
and witness fees, Sixteen Dollars
and Thirty, Gents {$16.30,) while the
voucher shows Sixteen Dollars and
Sixty Gents ($1660.)
We suggest to the County Commits
sioners that they require parties pre-
senting bills to them for allowance to
make them out with pen and INK or
upon typewriter, and that they show
when the services were performed, or
the materials furnished and how
mach.
We further suggest that the Com
missioners allow no more bills with
lead pencil.
We desire to thank the County Off
Gals for any courtesy shown us in
our investigation.