The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1905-07-02

which have blaekened the name of your
city.
The total fines collected for the period
were SS2 1887 RENTED by the mayor, S15.-
III; total $47S50.s1
While 1t is no doubt true that a num-
Der of cases We're worthy of executive
clemency, the mayors action In remitting
80 per cent of the above total has resulted
not only in considerable loss of revenue to
the city. but has tended to bring the
court into contempt and to render un-
availing to a great extent the J1age's cf-
forts to enforce the law.
If the $4,000 fines RENTED In sixteen
months Is a fair average. the mayors ae-
ton In this respect during the six years
of his incumbency has cost the city in
loss of income more than 100000. which
would have lessened the city deficit more
than one-haif. In addition to this he has
In only few instances complied with the
law, as laid down in the code, which pro-
vides In section q, page II of the city
charter that THE mayor shall have
power to remit or commute fines, costs
forfeitures and penalties duly imposed for
violation Of any ordinance or charter pro-
vision, but he shall make a report of
same to the board at the next session
thereof. with his reasons thereof, in
writing"
On May Is, 1904, the mayor was author
lied to borrow $685. 600, to be paid out of
the first tax receipts, which he did In
August he borrowed $4,000 more, and in
September $4,000. making a total of $50. 600.
This was $4,000 more than he was author
lied by the board to borrow, and $50. 600
more than the full amount which the city
is allowed to borrow under the charter;
which provides as per section 70 that the
city shall never be in debt for loans of
money exceeding the sum of $4,000 in the
aggregate, exclusive of its bonded indebt-
edness. While 1t may be true that the
urgent necessity existed and Ii is a fact
that the board afterwards ratified this ac-
ton, 1t does not alter the fact that 1t was
unauthorized and Illegal
General Exceptions.
Payrolls were signed by (x) mark and
not witnessed, amounting to $14S31 49,
Nearly all these payrolls were for the
street force and should have had the
affidavit OF the paymaster attached GER
tifying to the fact that he had paid the
stated amounts to the proper parties.
On February 8, 1902, the matter of ex-
ira compensation to the city physician
for services rendered on account of small
pox, then existing. was referred to the
Mayor and sanitation committee with
power to act. No report was made to
the board, but 800 per month extra was
paid him in addition to his regular SAL
airy of $50 per month, until September,
1904, Except five summer months), maxi
ing total extra compensation of $1,000,
when this expense was stopped by the
board.
On February 8, 1905 there was paid
j. w. Sibley, treasurer, for entertaining
Brickmakers' association, s100 The vouch-
er for this payment states that the APP
preparation was made at a special meet
Ing of the finance committee January 2s
The minutes do not show that this action
was ratified; on the contrary, on Febru-
airy l. two days before the payment of
this voucher a resolution was passed
by the board not to make any appropria-
ton for the securing of, or for enter
tanning the members of any convention
or society meeting in Birmingham.
From April /, 1904, to May /, 1905, $780,
or $50 per month. has been paid the stem
ographer for the city attorney Except
the month of September The minutes do
not show that this payment was author
lied. These payments were charged to
Judgments and costs" or to 'miscel-
laneous account" when they should have
been charged to legal expenses" had
they been authorized.