The Eureka sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1902-current, 1903-04-11

&aCAA -
coming report Of the late Grand Jury there
comes a glimmering of utterly inefficient
if not completely rotten Encouragement
of Nye county financial affairs in the past.
1t is stated on good authority that the
members OF the Grand Jury, acting in
accordance with instructions Of the pre-
siding Judge In the matter Of investigat-
ing the condition of the county books,
found such lack Of original vouchers that
no expert on earth could tell whether
apparent results as to amounts collected
or expended are correct or not. Such
being the situation somebody Is to blame.
whether from Incompetence or actual
dishonesty. We see no reason why the
Grand Jury did not request Judge Breen
to order the employment Of a professional
expert, and then remain in session,
technically, until it might be ready to
report and take action upon the findings
OF such examination. But the jury has
been discharged and il o remains for
another branch Of the local government
to show the taxpaying people where they
are at. The county commissioners are
called upon to employ a competent ac-
countant and expert for the next six
months, If necessary, in order to settle
| upon the financial balances assumed to
exist when the present term officers took
charge OF the work. II it is shown that
there has been defalcation, the fact will
not be an entirely new episode in the
history of this county. Even II unto
ward fate does continue the court officials
and records in the environment of Sena-
ior Bells county seat, the people of Ton
opah have the right to know whence
their tax money has gone. In short, If it
appears that Nye county is in arrears
financially the people want to know why,
and will c%heerfully indorse all expendi-
ture that the board may make in order to
ascertain every truth that q thorough
and systematic investigation al possibly
bring forth. If there be "something
rotten in Denmark" let us all know it,
Tonopah Bonanza, April 4, 1903.
Judge Breen informs the SENTINEL
there is a slight error in the statement in
the above article, that the Grand Jury
was discharged" The Grand Jury
was not discharged" but Excused"
until June IL to enable them to report
~intelligently upon the condition of the
financial affairs Of the county.
The jury, in a partial report, and other
wise, informed the Court that, in con-
sequence of many Irregularities in the
manner of keeping county books, and
other questionable things, it would be
absolutely impossible for them to COM
ply with that part of the Courts charge
relating to the management Of the county
affairs by county officers, without the
aid, of an expert bookkeeper, and as no
| such 81 pert was to be found in Belmont,
and furthermore, rs a thorough investiga-
| ton would consume considerable time,
| the Grand Jury was excused and Court
| took q recess until June IL, as above
stated.
To discharge" the Grand Jury would
be to necessitate the calling of a new jury
at great cost and expense to the county
| and inconvenience of citizens.
The Grand Jury found two indictments
for embezzlement against F. H. Max
| we'll, whose trial. as well as that Of the
| State against v. Wheece. charged with
| assault with intent to kill. was set for
June II. on which day a trial jury will be
on hand.
The constitutionality of the law passed
by the last Legislature relating to hold
| ing OF sessions of court in Tonopah vas
freely discussed by the lawyers present,
| and a speedy and economical way sug-
| gested for testing the same, as follows:
To make demand upon the County Com
missioners for providing proper rooms
for the use OF the Court and Clerk" at
| Tonopah, under section 5 of the Act, and
| upon the Commissioners declining to do
| 80, mandamus them before the Supreme
| Court.
The final settlement Of the question is
| simply q matter of cold business pru-
| dence, and not of sentiment or local
| pride. If Court were held in Tonopah
tomorrow and an important judgment
rendered therein, the defeated party
would surely test the validity Of the
judgment,in' the Supreme Court. Such.
was the expressed opinion of a reputable
attorney present.