Arizona republican., 1905-11-21

three weeks ago described the exist ence and so much as was known of the claim on which this action has been brought and the refusal of the board of supervisors to recognize it.
 M. w. Messinger was formerly trea- surer of the county and was succeeded by J. Elliott Walker Not long after MT Walker took office Mir. Messinger called upon and told him that he had discovered that in the settlement of his affairs he had S1.000 more than be- longed to him. It was his opinion that the money belonged to the county but he was not sure of that. He desired to leave S1.000 with MT. Walker. not to be immediately turned into the trea- sury but to be kept in the safe until MT. Messinger and Mir. Walker could make an examination of the accounts of the office and ascertain where the money came from.
 It was also decided at the time that nothing should be said about the mat ter until the discovery sought for should be made. The supervisors how ever were let into the secret and the examination of the books of the office was begun and carried along for sever al months. It could never be found that the county had not received from Mir. Messinger all the money which MT. Messinger had collected during his incumbency but it was thought that the money might have been from the sale of property for taxes: that is the sale by mistake of property on which the taxes had actually been paid but which by an error had got into the delinquent list Several instances of that kind have been found in success sive administrations of the office and corrected. There had been instances of the kind within the administration of MT. Messinger. It was possible that this $1,000 was made up of sums re- ceived for the sale of property belong ing to absent owners who had forward ed the money for their taxes and had not learned of the sale of the property for delinquent taxes. As unlikely as this theory appeared to be there seem- ed to be no other to account for the money.
 At the conclusion of a very eXhaus- tive examination of the accounts, MT. Messinger reiterated that the money did not belong to him; he thought it belonged to the county and though he did not directly authorize it to be turned into 2 fund it was the opinion of MT. Walker and the supervisors that he had renounced any claim to it.
 MT. Walker kept the money in the safe though until near the end of his second term when after a conference with the board of supervisors it was turned into the general fund.
 Last spring V. E. Messinger who had been appointed administrator of the estate of his father brought the mat ter before the board but no claim was formally made until less than a month ago when it was rejected and an- nOuncement was made that the suit would be brought
 The outcome of the case will be awaited with interest, for though. the county is in possession of evidence that Mr Messinger did not believe the mon- ey belonged to him and did believe thac it belonged to the county, yet the coun- ty has no evidence that MT. Messin- ger was sure about that. Nor can the county show in any other way why the money should have been turned in- to the treasury. Tn addition to the 5000 MT. Messinger sues for $500 dam ages incurred by the countys detention of the money.