Evening journal., 1903-12-26
SATURDAY. DECEMBER 40. 1898.
a REMARKAeLE LETTER.

A REMARKABLE LETTER.
The letter Of the General to
the Lovy Court shows considerable
heat. and we are inclined to think will
make the solution Of this question of
the magistrates accounts even more
dimcult II raises numerous questions
which the press may discuss without
that temper which has been shown by
officials
A brief history OF this controversy
becomes desirable in order that we may
reach proper conclusions. When re-
Gently the magistrates and constables
Of the county presented their quarterly
bills the Comptroller very properly
seruiinized them closely. Presumably
he came to the conclusion on a oursory
examination that the county had beer
oyercharged, so he began an investi-
cation. lie is authority for the state
ment that he invited each of the inter.
ested parties 20 conference where
they might present any evidence d.
substantiation Of their claims He ther
presented q report to the Levy Court
cutting down all Of the bills. and il
general terms accusing the magis
trates ana--constables Of practices
which to use the mildest term. mus
be called Irregular The Levy cour
then cut down the bills in accordance
with the Comptroners recommenda.
tion. Magistrate Hollis protested IN
somewhat lengthy letter TO the Levy
Court, and demanded an investigation
naturally regretting the grouping Of al
tho magistrates into one class. clasa
in which he was included.
AN Of this revealed that Mr.. Holn,
was represented by counsel having 10
tanned both the Attorney General an.
his deputy. The Levy Court afte
reading the communication Of Mr.. Iiol
rs. by resolution referred the Who'll,
matter 70 the Attorney General for tn.
Vestigation, and this brought forth
letter from that official in which con
siderable heat was shown. Mr.. War.
id his letter says:
A little consideration OF this remark
able document has led me to concludc
two things: First that they We're fran
ed by some one Who seeks through IA,
Improper use Of and the unwitlini
complaisance Of. tho Levy Court 4
place me in a false position before tn
public; and second. that the perso
who drafted the resolution. as wen
the body which passed il, should hav,
taken legal advice before 80 acting.
AS far as the public is Informed O
these proceedings the above is unnec
essorily severe, inasmuch as ii accuse
the Levy Court of either stupidity o
malice. or course il that body though
it had a matter which it should rofe
to The Attorney General 1t was no
bound 20 know onicially whether Mi
Wad represented as private counse
amy party involved. IN fact. this ref
erenco tovhim of case IN which h
was asked TO act IN an Official capac
ity, though he was interested as pri
waite counsel, was the highest sort q
a compliment. since il demonstrate
that the court expected him to perfou
his official duty first. II the court wa
mistaken in asking him TO perform
duty that did not devolye on him.
strikes us that a courteous declinatio
would have been more appropriate.
Mr Ward says regarding shis matter
rWiih such duties Of the comptrolle
and the Levy Court, IN the absence 8
public necessity. the Attorney Genera
has under the law no legal right 4
interfere" We do not presume 4
question his Interpretation OF his dut,
under the law. since he is the Attor
ney-General OF the state. and shoul.
be the best authority on such matters
but when be places the respousibilit.
Of prosecutions on the Levy Court. /
that body is dissatisfied. we are oblige,
10 note an exception. or at least to reg
lister a doubt. lie says: 'Is you do no
do This If there may be q proper case
your action may properly appear repre-
hensihie.' IL strikes US that this Re
mark 50 unvarranted. Suppose IN.
Levy Court should decide to prosecute
81 would Be most remarkable TO see tn
Acknowledgement appearing for the de
fensc, and s. It not possible that
Knowledge that the Attorney-Genera
represents the defense may deter on
ciala from prosecutingg
We 90 not think the duty devolve
on the Levy Court, nor on tho Comp
trollcr. They arc concerned in lookin
afior the county's finances. Thoy scru
iiniza all bills FOR the sole purpose q
ascertuining their correctness bofor
paying them. ana there it occurs to i
their responsibility ends. Besides. "
take il that tie Levy Court as a bod
cannot prosecute; that would have
Be the work Of Individuals. and wol
x part q tie duty Ct monbor
prosecute al cases coming within h
notics. sae ofiieq wouid DO most und
ssrabis. Tho Attorney General max
e plein the.ss he eeees eeees not regard Il