The Washington times., 1903-06-27


bursements Mr.. Rogers. having re-
ceived the check. would indorse under
my signature and go in person for the
cash. except when unable from the pres
sure Of business to leave his Office. on
which occasions he wyuld sometimes
send Watson with the check and de-
nomination slip to the bank for the
money, which involved but little risk,
as the bank was near and any pro-
longed absence would have called Cor
immediate investigation.
Blame Put on Lapham.
". R. Lapham, the clerk who is in
charge OF the accounting for the Dis
trict engineer department. comes in for
q generous share OF blame in Mr.. Pet
tvs report. Mr.. Petty states that
Watson and Lapham checked the de-
posit and assessment fund over to-
gether. He says that the late Miss NJ.
s. West, who checked the engineer de-
partment funds kept in the Treasury,
always demanded a certificate OF de-
post TO show that funds had been turn
ed into the Treasury, and that he sup
bank books kept by Watson.
Mr.. Petty discusses Mr.. Lapham's
failure to investigate Watson's bank
books as follows:
The deposit and assessment fund &C
counts, which are outside the regular
system of the office. were in Watson
sole charge and custody. 1t was only
one mans work to keep them, and as
my force is small, each one being COM
PEELED often TO work after office hours
in order TO meet the demands upon him,
no second examination by another clerk
in my Office was possible. Nor was this
demand necessary in Watson's case, for
the reason that a similar account was
kept in the engineer department. and
under the system of checking, to which
1 have just referred. no apprehension
as to safety was ever entertained.
Couldn't Watch Watson.
The clerk in charge of this &C
count In the engineer department. W.
r. Lapham. is one whose skill and abil-
in the front rank of accountants. No
one knows better than he every intri-
cacy OF the relationships which subsist
between the debit and credit sides OF
a ledger, or which may develop In the
process of keeping and comparing &C
counts. be they ever so complex or in
volved. nor could he be told anything
that he does not already know concern
ing the value OF a check by one indie
pendent ONCE upon another in com
parison between them OF related and
corresponding accounts.
"As already stated, l had no one who
could follow Watson, but II my force
had been ample for the purpose, no
value, as a safeguard, would have at
tached to such a review that would be
comparable to the scrutiny of an out
side Office. 20 say nothing Of the fact
that in the case OF one Office checking
against itself there might be room for
suspicion of collision among its en-
! ployes.
"Messrs Lapham and Watson frequent
! ly interchanged visits for the ayowec
purpose OF comparing accounts and
| checking against each other, and all ap-
/ pearances indicated, so far as l could
| possibly judge without participating in
the examination. that the comparisons
were as thorough and complete as those
| relating to accounts under Congressional
| appropriations which were made by Miss
West with the chief bookkeeper Of the
Auditors Office"
Censure for Banks and Treasury.
In reply to the criticism that the
! Auditor should have suspected Watson
Of dishonesty because OF his expensive
! habits. Mr. Petty says In his report thai
| Watson assured him General Bryant
Mrs. watsons father. was very wealthy
s<d lavished money upon his daughter
Watson also alleged that he inherited Z
fortune Of $40, 600 from his grandmother
Banks in which the District fund
| were deposited and the Treasury Depart
ment also come in for much criticism
at Mr.. Pettys hands. He states tina
all his transactions. outside Of pay
roll disbursements, were carried on b.
means of checks. The acquisitions b
means OF which he obtained funds fro1
the Collector Of Taxes were paid b
CheckS, winch were always deposited II
banks.
Mr.. Petty discusses the alleged lac
OF caution on the part OF bankers an
Treasury officials as follows:
My deposits. which I sent Watson I
make. were invariably checks. and h
; would exhibit the handbook upon his re
turn as proof that they had been prop
erly made. / used TO indOrse over m
signature. For deposit to the credit OF
but he reported one day the bank con
sidered IL as restrictive in not giving
full acquittance. and asking that 1t b
! discontinued
Thinks Banks Were Careless.
AFT srward ! generally made simpl
Endorsements, but ] never. orally or
writing. accredited him 10 any bank i
Washington as one with authority 1
obtain the cash on these checks upo
my Endorsement az Auditor OF the DIS
trict OF Columbia. ! never sent h!r
, with one TO be cashed, and in view q
the well-known carefulness OF banks j
I paying out Government funds, the posi-
bility OF a mere clerk obtaining at wi
Z large aims OF money an chacke ,ybic