The daily journal. (Salem, Or.) 1899-1903, 1902-01-04

4
educate the people Of the state on this
matter. Some eccuse the officials OF
getting greater emoluments than they
are receiving. Most people do not
know the truth about the matter Let
us not exAggerate but get at the facts
and then paw fair and liberal salary
and put all the ieesin the state treasury.
-
HAS ANYTHING REALLY BEEN DE-
CIDED.
Our court has decided that the statute
Of limitations makes Il impossible 10 col.
lect on the bond Of Geo. W. Davis, the
defaulting clerk Of the school land board.
Another court has decided that the
state officials who employed that clerk
are not liable for his deialoation. This
would seem to let tho state down en-
tirely, az an Irlshman might say.
There are some curious condolences in
the history OF the case. Davis was APP
pointed July 26, 1891 and served until
July 81, 1896, or seven months into the
Lord administration.
II would seem 10 an ordinary person
that II there was deialcation during
his term that II would have been in ex-
istance, or would have accrued" az the
lawyers phase II, at the close Of his
term.
The oction 10 collect the shortage In
his cash accounts was begun by the state
on June 20, 1901. Davis lawyers we're
given until September l., 1901 to fle
their answer.
In the anSwer II Ia set forth that the
shortage existed before Jan, l, 1895, but
WAS not discovered by or was known to
the committee or the Legislature before
that date.
On this flImsy phraseology stipula-
tions were huilt up and decree rem
dered that as the shortage existed prior
TO Jaa, /, 1896. the cause of action against
Davis and his bondsmen created by
statute accrued prior 10 that date.
As the action was not begun until June
20, 1901, or within six years after Jan. /,
1896, the state was barred from recovery
on the bond by the statute OF limita-
tiOus which ls six years ON bond.
The shortage existed, II II existed at
all, land II is not denied) at the end of
Dayis's term, July 81, 1896. II was dis
covered In Feb. 1901, and reported to
the Legislature. suit was begun June
20, 1901. Yet by an assumption In the
Stpulations agreed TO by both state and I
defense the state loses its case on a fic- I
ton ana teehnlcallty,
To carry this fiction further II Is cot
up In the answer that thors we're sepa-
rate settlements between Davis and the
state, and one settlement with the Lord q
administration between January II, Il
1895. and Feb. 20, 1926. y
The decision that the state has lost <
because the doialcation existed on or be. Il
ore Jan. l, ls9s, brands the report Of Il
he legislative committee Of Feb. sS, il
1895, on the state land Office high born g
periury.
The editor Of this paper wishes to re-
'all As matter Of history that he was a !
member Of that legislature and do
lounoed the legislative investigation in
'dvanoo az a white Washing scheme to
over frauds, and not to uncover them
ie was not honored with place on any
4 those perlane.ory rommi1tees &
But look at the bare.taoed perjury OF
hat committee, II reported to the leg
stature that IL had employed "compe-
ont accountants 70 expert the books and b
econnts Of Geo. W. Davis." =
Il sOlemnly reported to the legislature pi
Nal ID had found the books and accounts al
Geo. W. Davis absolutely eOrrec, aud p
u moneys accounted lor." =
Those representatives aud senalora Ia
wore ever their signatures that they had N
carefully added" he sums received by se
he clerk and turned over to the trea. ~ ~
arer, and compared the amounts with "
10 receipts aud had found them an cor
.ct n
The special committee that reported =
ia deialession lass February speciacal. eal
stated that the fraud was % oOarso, sls