Arizona silver belt., 1904-10-13

Book 4, page l30, no fee.
 Pascoe to Thompson, Sept. 26, 1901.
 Book 1, page 13S.
 As sample of short fee collections.
 the mining deed of sandidge to Bos-
 ton Globe Copper Mines company, of
 date of on pages T and 72 of Mines
 Book, the fee shown is sl.35 and the
 fee ought to be about $3.6O according | to law.
 On page 447 blotter a fee of s2 is re-
 ported from Nellie Haverley, and A
 side memorandum says collect s3.n
 In the Book of Mines Deeds. the
 deed from Azbill to Taught, in Book
 6, at page 76, shows no vendors name
 in deed.
 In same book, in deed from Collum
 to Chilson, the jurats of acknowledg-
 ments are not shown. Either this was error in recording and not comparing, or else a violation of Section 2lI. of
 paragraph l13S.
 In record of deed at page PA, in Book of mines, the name of the gran tee does not appear. F. l.. Toombs is grantor.
 In same book at page 257, name of grantor, T. F. Childers, does not ap- pear signed to deed.
 It then being thought that the is. suance of warrants might be found different from the demands, the de- mands were tried with the warrant stubs. A few small errors were found and demand and warrant each No. 1T. Demand was by w. Middleton for 60 days work at B per day, s1sO and the warrant was drawn, issued and paid for $lS6; but these two are clerical errors.
 Demands for Messrs. Stratton, Hur- ley, Ellison and others were made out. signed, sworn to for the party and at- tested by Clerk Williams; he did if all. The supposition is he was asked 10 do so by the parties, but under the law his acts were very wrong.
 During last three months of 1902, he wrote up no minutes of the meetings ,f the board of supervisors, and vet hey had to meet, canvass election re- turns, and also at the end of the year or closing the business; but no min- ltes or allowance were written up. ret he issued about 200 warrants in hat quarter, some of them to himself or salary, etc. This was all irregu- ar, and the question as to liability for Villful neglect and holding out money rises.
 We then took up records of articles If incorporation, to test for fees re- 'orted for certified copies. The laxity oove shown looks very much like method, and the grand jury might md some business in it, but the mounts susceptible of proof that are involved are small.
 The articles for the Blac k Warrior ecorded show only s2 collected for he fees and nothing for the certified OpieS, neither does he show the D ent fee for certifying to the CODY, Ihich had to be done.
 Same case is shown in that of Gold ulch company, page 195, in same ook.
 Also, Great Northern Oil company, ime book, same showing.
 Globe Electric company, Book 1, age lS7, March 20, 1902; proper fee record would be about S4. He shows ally B, and shows nothing for fee for .rtifed copy required by law, nor le 75 cents for the certificate. University Club Prospecting system me case.
 Also, in case of Arizona Colorado ,mpany, same.
 Also, Grand Prize Mining company, me. A fee of $6 is shown, and 20 'ntS for agents appointment, but othing for certified copy or certif- Ite
 In the case of the Brookner Con- my and that of the Confederate ines company, a fee for certificate
 each instance was collected of 75c Id reported ou the Blotter. This 'oves that the recorder knew the WIS requirement. and county dues. he question arises, why did he make .ceptiOns of these items? Missouri Arizona Mining company ticles, June 30th, 1900, 10 copy or rtifcate fee shown, and only $2.25 T recording.
 Black Warrior Mining company, sc. b, 1899, fee of Si.50 shown; no rtitied copy of certificate fee shown. Arizona Exploration company, same ing $4.50. Live Oak Copper company, Book 1, ge 77, light fee for the recording,
 $2.35 and nothing for the other ,ms.