The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1902-10-18
7. 7. KELLY FACTS
What the Second Findings of
Commissioners Show.
Still Owes Miami County Over
Four Hundred Dollars.
HE HAS PAID $1,324.99.
This Brings Total Shortage to
Over I,7OO.
Given Benefit of Every Doubt in
Examination.
Detailed SUDDlemental Report
HE HAS PAID S1,324.99.
Detailed Supplemental Report
of County Commissioners.


commissioners of Miami county holds
that Thomas T Kelly still owes Miami
county S4I201 on two fraudulent war
rants. one for $3.50 and the other Tor
$3.50 This is in addition to the $l,324.J9
heretofore found against Kelly ana Ie-
turned to the county by him.
Another warrant was found which hao
been raised from $42.2 .25 to $142.25, and the
report finds that Miami county was de-
frauded out of 500 by the raising OF
the warrant, but as the records 90 hvt
show conclusiVely that Kelly got the
money it is not charged against NM
There are also numerous lrregularllleS
and some small duplicated warrants
but as the records DO not positively
urove Kelly guilty of fraud in any of
these cases he is not held. Ine only
cases in which he is held guilty of fraud
is where the evidence against MIN Is
positive
The following is the report of the ma
terial findings Of this last investigation,
as given by the Miami Republican:
A typewriter report, covering ten or
twelve pages being portion OF the
findings of the county commissioners OF
the records of ThOS. T. Kelly while
county clerk, was made Tuesday. capt.
Reuben Smith, a member OF the county
board, was taken seriously i'll at noon
Tuesday with kidney trouble and was
compelled to return home, and the re-
port was not completed in consequence
From the report submitted we take the
following. which gives additional proof
of Kelly's official corruption:
At the January session, 1890 of the
board, Thomas T. Kelly became county
clerk The errors and Irregularities
noted below do not include the errors
and Irregularities heretofore reported
upon by us in a former investigation.
Here follows list, giving dates. num-
bers and series, showing over 250 war
rant stubs not receiDted for by any
body a detailed list is given of stubs
that blank re cling
some of these through the treasurer $
books it is found by the commissioned
some of the warrants of corresponding
numbers had been paid, although the
stubs show no entry whatever
The report then proceeds as follows:
October z, 1880, James Requa filed a
voucher for $30.S5 and said claim was
allowed same date for $30.S5 and was
paid on warrant 1175. This was pau
per bill and warrant stub is written:
Ma. Kindale, Bingin, Cooper Swartz &
Devo."
On same date another warrant, No.
1895. was issued to the same person and
for the relief of the same named pau
pers for S5175, but there is no voucher
on fle and no record of its allowance.
The stub of this warrant is not receipt
ed.
April a. 1901 w. ]. Bound filed his
voucher for SO for overseeing the poor.
The back of the voucher. the commits
sioners' blotter and journal all show
q that SIS only was allowed. This amount
was paid by warrant No. 1861 and was
receipted for same date by ". J. Bound
On the same da te d duplicate warrant. No
1891, was drawn in favor of w J. Bound
for the same purpose and for the same
amount, and purports to be receiDted
for by w J. Bound. The signatures tC
these warrants do not appear to have
been signed by the same person. The
stubs of these warrants are in tn,
handwriting of Thomas T. Kelly. county
clerk.
April A. 1891. Miller Bros. presented
3 their voucher for Sc for coffin for S
Blount DauDer. and the same was al.
lowed the same date. warrant No. 17Si
being drawn for Sc and receiDted for by
Miller Bros. On the same date a dupli
cate warrant was drawn. No. 1891 il
favor of the same FIRM for the sam,
amount for coffin account pauper. Fol
this last warrant no voucher is on file
no allowance is shown either on tn,
commissioners journal or blotter Thi,
duplicate warrant purports to be signed
by Miller Bros, but the signature to thl
warrants do not appear TO be signed bl
the same person. The stubs of thes
1 warrants are in the handwriting o
Thomas T. Kelly.
April IA. 1891. warrant No. 1896 wal
changed from $3.50 to $4.40
AS u protection against fraud in paw
ment of bounty on wolf scalps, the Law
provides that no person shall be en-
titled to receive any bounty withou
first making affidavit in writing, file,
with the county clerk. that the wolf wa
captured and killed within the count
in which the bounty is claimed" de
tailed list is herewith given in whicl
wolf scalp vouchers and affidavits mad
out in handwriting Of Thomas T. Kelly
which are neither sworn to. signed no
attested. May %, 1891, Thomas T Keli-
made out a voucher to - Woods. ac
count of wolf scalp. Sc Face of vouch
er reads Mr. Woods" This is no
sworn to and is not even signed b
Woods or by Mr.. Woods. The addi
tional affidavit which should supper
this claim and which is on file in tn
office of the county clerk is as follows
Affidavit for wolf scalp bounty
state of Kansas. Miami county. ss:
I, -- Woods, of Sugar creek. d
solemnly swear that the wolf scalp. on
in number. were taken from wolf kille
in Miami county. Kansas, on - da
of May, 1891. and that I am lawfully en-
titled to the bounty Of Sc each"
1t will thus be seen that this add
tional affidavit which is supposed to b
a protection against fraud is itself
fraud. as it is neither sworn to, signe
by - W WoOds or Mr. Woods.
October 10 1891. Thomas T. Kell-
county clerk. writes out a voucher
favor of Henry Mooney: To bounty n
wolf scalp. Sc This voucher is neitht
sworn to or signed and there is no COZ
roborating affidavit on file
December %, 1891. Thomas T. Kell
4 writes another voucher for Henr
voucher is sworn to before Kelly h
Mooney making his mark, Kelly signir
as witness to mark. The supporting a
fidavit to the above is also signed 7
Mooney making his mark.
May 13. 1892. Tnos. T. Kelly writes al
other voucher for Henry Mooney: I
bounty WOLF scalps. IS. This voucher
properly sworn to before Kelly and