Kootenai County Republican. (Rathdrum, Idaho) 1899-1903, 1902-03-07

s.4rs
General bridge ........................,. 4,212eG
Total ......t..... .. 81, s6
Cash received during 1901 TO apply on above
Warrants:
Cur. Exp and War. Rcdemp. funds si0,s9s s4
General road fund ....................... s,04697
General bridge fund .................... 3f769l
Total .......... ............ ......... 81 i2 II
Now. the Information we wish to convey to
you and the public, who might be misin-
formed by your former article Is that there
were $9.5lli4 less warrants issued on the eur
rent expense fund in 1901 than in 1900 while
there was 81 30 less cash received with which
To pay those warrants; also that the amount
OF warrants issued In excess Of the cash re-
cei~ed 10 apply on said warrants ssG,64
which you will SEE by comparison was on ac-
count OF bridges and roads - there was
$720.67 more cash received in the current ex-
pense and warrant redemption funds than the
amount OF warrants issued on that fund. And
we wish to say further that the excess OF the
total receipts for 1901 over those for 1869, il
accounted for as follows: We have $1,000 OF
bonds that fall due in May, 1902, the payment
for which there was provision made in the
extra tax levy; the schools OF the county
have received more In 1901 by s7.O5s.l4 than in
1850, and the incorporated towns sl.6i07O
more In 1901 than In 1900.
You make the error Of comparing the total
receipts for 1901 with those for 1900. without
telling the public where and To what funds
those receipts are applied. leaving your arti-
Gle In such Il shape AS TO infer that the whole
amount could be applied toward reducing the
warrant Indebtedness, when as matter OF fact
only II portion Of II can be so applied.
You will also see by comparing the state
ments of January, 1901 and January. 1862. that
the the total net debt OF the county on .Janu-
airy. 1901, was Sis2.0s7.n, while on January.
1902. il was Si77is0.26. showing n net reduct-
ton Of the debt during the year OF 81. ops5i
The above figures are from the ics In tho
auditors Office and can be verified by anyone
desiring to do so. BY publishing the above
statement you Will show the exact truth In
the comparison Of the two former years. and
Will eradicate any wrong impression that
may have gotten out through your former
article Respectfully yours,
A. COOK.
Deputy Auditor.
The Republican is always willing to
correct an error II given an Opportuni-
ty to do So and II the asticle published
last week under the caption of can
Expensive Lesson" was incorrect and
misleading, as Mr.. Cook alleges, we
are pleased to make amends by giving
space to the above statement.
However, with the record facts at
hand, the Republican is obliged to
take issue with Mr.. Cook on several
points touched upon in the above
statement. These points are Of sutfl-
cient Importance to warrant the asser.
ton that our article OF last week was
neither incorrect nor misleading, and
that il the Republicans figures were
wrong the figures appearing in the of
fetal statement of the auditor and
treasurer, from which our informa-
ton was taken, are wrong also.
In the first place the Republican
disclams any intention to misinform
or mlslead the taxpayer as Mr.. Cook
charges, and proof of this lies in the
fact that the statement of the audi
tor-and treasurer appeared in the Re-
publican simultaneously with our ar
tiele under the caption of "An EXpen-
siye LESSON II our figures were
wrong the statement appearing on
another page of the same issue would
have disproved them. In view of
this 1t is difficult to understand the
object Of Mr.. Cooks explanation, un-
less it be to confuse the taxpayers,
who may be interested in the matter,
by supplying supposed facts which do
not appear in the auditor and treas
urer's statement.
Mr.. Cook states that we ''are in er-
ror in saying there are $4o5s4. 80 out
standing current expense warrants for
which there is no money in the treas
ury. when in fact the statement
shows 81, 62e.36.' We are not in err
ror and the statement does not show
what Mr.. Cook alleges On the con-
trary, the statement shows that the
outstanding current expense warrant
Indebtedness is $40, 1913. 81 and that the
amount of cash in the treasury to the
credit of that fund is S9,3093I. The
difference between those two amounts
Is $40, 5S4,50, just as appeared in our
article Of last week, and we prefer to
take the figures of the statement
rather than Mr.. Cooks supplementary
figures.
-. ,,,N,<.,.,t,... 4. .f,a.......