The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-11-02
ONLY WHAT RECORDS SHOW

statement that he clipped the coupons
/ from the Wichita bonds, the last item
/ in the report of the state accountants
published in the State Journal last Sat
urday.
The Topeka Capital also says that c.
| z. Foote or John r.. Mulvane may pos
sibly have clipped the coupons from the
Pratt township bonds which T. T. Kelly
| sent to New York for collection at the
same time he sent in the Garden City
coupons.
1t is true that many of the shortages
occur on the first and second coupons
after the bonds were purchased by the
state, because it is easier to clip these
and hide the fact than it is to clip sub
sequent coupons
But it is also true that there are sew
eral thousand dollars of shortages on
coupons which were clipped long after
the bonds were purchased by the state.
Here are a few of these instances:
Away back in 1890 the school fund
commission bought $4,000 of Cowley
| county bonds bearing per cent in
terest. The state received interest on
them from that time up to September
1, 1899, when they were refunded for
a like amount of bonds bearing per
cent interest, but Cowley county
agreed to pay an additional one per
cent interest up to July 1, 1900 On
September %. 1899, the interest on the
old bonds was all paid up and also the
additional interest up to July l, 19OO-
The first coupon on the new bonds was
also paid and accounted for all right,
but the second coupon, due september
/, 1900, amounting to $1,94O, was paid
to the fiscal agency and duly cred1teo
by the fiscal agency to the state treas
urer but it has never been accounted
| for on the treasurer's books. THESE
bonds were never owned by anyone
but the state. and no one else ever
had any right to interest on them
The $1o5.000 of Johnson county
bonds were purchased in 1890, but it is
the interest due July 1, 1900. that IS
missing. This was certainly not cI1p-
ped by outside parties 1t amounts to
On June 13. 1899, $4,000 of Reno
county bonds were purchased The
interest came due on June L and De-
cember 1 of each year The accrued
interest from June L to June 13, 1899,
was paid by the state to the holder
of the bonds. thereby emitting the
state to the entire coupon due Decem-
ber l, 1899. This and the next cou-
pom were paid into the school fund all
right but a shortage of $1,52O occurs
on the third coupon. There is no
doubt but what that was the property
of the state.
There are many instances in which
the first coupon due after bonds were
purchased by the state is not account
ed for, but the second coupon is shown
to have been duly paid to the fiscal
agency in New York and placed to
the state treasurer's account, but the
state. treasurer has never accounted
cases of Marmaton and Omnia town
ships, Allen county; in the case of
Ford county bonds; Courtland town.
ship. Republic county; Grant town
ship. Reno county, and several others.
The books of the fiscal agency show
that these second coupons all went
into the state treasury but they have
never been accounted for. If they
had not been the property of the state
they would not have been placed to
the credit of the state treasurer by
the fiscal agency.
In the case of school district No 1,
Rice county, $500 of bonds were pur-
chased by the state May 2, 1900.
The interest from that date to July 1,
1900, amounting to S56.25 and from
July l, to January 1, 1901 amounting
to $16S75. was sent to the fiscal agency
by the Rice county people, and WAS
duly placed to the credit of the state
treasurer by the fiscal agency. but has
never been accounted for by the treas
urer.
In the case of the $4,000 bonds of
Waterloo township, Lyon county, the
the interest which had accrued on the
bonds UP to the time of their purchase.
This entitled them to all coupons on
the bonds. but the first two coupons
have never been accounted for.
The Capital lays stress on the fact
that only the Garden City coupons, the
two sets of Pratt county township cou-
tion coupons are chargeable to T. 7.
Kelly's administration. No attempt is
made to explain or defend those short
ages that came prior to the time Mr..
Kelly became state treasurer. although
he was directly in charge of the states
funds during the four years that Frank
Grimes was state treasurer.
During the~time that Grimes was
treasurer and Kelly was his assistant,
Kelly ran the financial end of the
treasurer's office while Grimes ran the
politics. For instance, during the Bur-
ton senatorial campaign Grimes was
wholly engrossed with Burton's in
terests and Kelly ran the treasury.
This fact is carefully avoided by Kelly's
defenders.
AS a matter of fact the treasury has
been under one management for six
years, and during that time it has
never been checked up Either Kelly
or Grimes is responsible for the short
ages during the Grimes administration,
and kelly's past record would tend to
throw the suspicion in his direction, al
though Grimes is civilly liable to the
state for the shortages
No explanation is offered why cou-
pons should be clipped from bonds
which bore only 4 per cent interest on
their face, when 1t has been the policy
of the school fund commissioners not
many desirable bonds have been turned
down by the commissioners because
they could not be purchased so as to |
net the state 4 per cent.
Yet over 5000, 900 of bonds on which |
shortages of over $4,000 appear bore |
only per cent on their face and |
Kelly's defenders would make it ap-
pear that all this amount was clipped |
by authority of the school fund com
missioners. And most of the other |
bonds on which shortages appear bear |
only Az and Az per cent, which is a |
very low rate.
The Capital attempts to create a pre-
sumption that c. E. Foote clipped the T
coupons from the two sets of Pratt |
bonds and may have done so from the /
Garden City bonds. Judge Foote has |
absolutely stated that he did not clip |