Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-05-15

by teamster," appears thereon at reg
ular intervals for sums ranging from
s45 to SAP for each two weeks This, APP
parently, Is In addition to an allowance
OF S25 per month which is made TO the
same officer for team hire under reso-
luton of the council
PAY THE MONEY BACK.
Extra compensation refunded: The
books of the city treasurer show that Of
the above appropriations the following
have been refunded
II. 7. Randall. councilman 49,. $4,000
A. H. Moyes. councilman ...,.... 10000
w. r. Emmett, councilman .,..... 10000
Il. W, Chambers, councilman 80. 10000
Warrants for extra compensation IN
hands of Audltor-The following war
rants, issued by authority OF the appro-
priatons set forth, are still in the
hands of the auditor;
r. H. Carr, councilman ..,......s loO.50
VI. r. Randall, councilman ....... l0O.50
j. G.. Nye. councilman ...,,.,,,.. 10000
Max Davidson, councilman go. loO.oO
The warrant above referred to IN IA
vor OF j. G.. Nye. It appears, was de-
livered by the auditor to Mr.. Nyo,
property receipted for. and afterwards
returned to the auditor and the receipt
cancelled.
The warrant IN favor ~ Max David
son. il is shown. was delivered TO Mr..
Davidson receipted for presented to
the treasurer and paid bearing the can
collation. stamp OF tie city treasurer.
II appears, however, that some time af-
ter the cancellation stamp of the city
treasurer was erased, the warrant re-
turned to the city auditor and the re-
cept on the claim erased.
Extra Compensation. Recommends
tions--lt Is questionable " the city
council has authority in law TO make
these payments of extra compensa-
ton. and We therefore suggest that
iudlcial decision he procured. and
should II be ascertaned that the pay
ments were without warrant of law,
then all of the amounts so appropriat-
ed, less the amounts previously re-
funded. should be covered back into the
city treasurer. and the warrants sun
awaiting delivery be cancelled
DOUBLE PAY FOR RECORDER.
Notary Fees.-.Undcr a resolution of
the city council adopted prior to 1904,
the city recorder. w. j, Critchlow was
1 allowed SIS per month for services as
notary public I'm verifying claims, etc,
During each month OF 1904 and 1905
Mr.. Critchlow presented his claim for
these services and each month accept
ed tho payment of 50 and receipted
the claims therefor thusly; Received
payment lin full Of above account
Notwithstanding this in December,
1905. he presented 10 the city council
1 n claim for $40 additional, which the
| council allowed and the mayor APP
| proved In the following form:
| FOR notarlal services in 1904
and 1905, AZ $1,000 per
| month .....s..t..,... -''' Wv w
payments on account go. 1g0. 90
| Balance ..,...,......s -'s.'' Ni@V' w
| ing absolutely without warrant.
This appropriation we deem as be-
| In connection with this matter, we
| call your attention to the following.
/. A great many claims have not
| been verified at all, although the city
paid at the rate Of so per month 10
| have them all verified.
.. A large number OF claims have
been improperly verified.
g. a number Of claims without the
signature of the claimant have,
however, the signature and seal
81 W. J. Critchov, notary
public, indicating that the notary
had attached his signature and affixed
his seal In blank. without first oftain-
ing the signature of claimant TO the
claim
g. The notary in many Instances
does not affx his seat at all. In some
instances he affixes his seal, but does
not sign his name.
We desire to take up again and
discuss the practise followed respect
ing the claims vouchers and pay rolls
But few of them have any notation
thereon showing whether or not they
We're allowed and ordered paid by the
city council The city recorder should
note on each claim or pay roll the ao-
| ton Of the council respecting the same.
| The law requires the mayor TO approve
all appropriations made by the council
and disbursements made by the city.
The mayor during 1904 and 1905 does
not appear to have approved over his
| own signature more than 10 per cent
! of the claims and pay rolls The pre-
| Valing practice seems to have been for
| q list of the claims TO have been pre-
pared and submitted to the council
with a recommendation by the stand
| ing claims committee" that the claims
! shown thereon be allowed and order
| ed paid. This list has been approved
| by the mayor, but, we submit thaC the
| allowance by the council of these
| claims In bunch, and the approval at
all, by the mayor affxing his signature
| 10 the claim list Is not compliance
| with the law
When the mayor disapproves Of any
| claim appearing on the so-called
| claims list" he drew line through
| the item on the list and transmitted
| n veto message to the council.
| a ahg nf M
| from the city In 1904 and 1906 Coun-
| clmcn Williams and Craig were elect
| ed at different times acting mayor, and
| II Is very noticeable that when the act
| ing mayor had occasion TO approve
| claims or pay rolls he personally In
| proper manner affixed his signature
| To the claim or pay roll In the place
provided for that purpose. Even
| though the claims reach the council
| I'm mn incomplete manner as to item
| zatiOn, verifcation, certification by
| the auditor. approval by the proper
| committee OF the council, they should
| not. IN fact, then he allowed and or
| dered paid by the council. This Is
| the final check az TO the completeness
| and correctness of the claim or pay
| roll. Upon any claim reaching the
| council incomplete IN any respect, same
| should be Immediately referred for
| correction.
The auditors conclude their volumi-
| nous report by making suggestions on
the following subjects
Claims, How TO be Kept" Minutes,
Signing and Comparison city Audi
tor, Signing Pay Roll" Postage,
Freight, kilograms. etc. Attaching
Vouchers Chiefs Sundries;" Con-
tractors. Estimates Vouchers, etc. -
| Endorsement Of Warrants" Record.
err and Auditor, Duties and Compensa.
| ton"
! ----s~-s----
| FAMOUS STRIKE BREAKERS.