The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-03-12
Who Is Responsible
Lawless Expendit
Peoples Mond
TAXPAYERS ARE AN
SOME POINTED d
Is 1t the COmmissi|
State Officials. or
nation of the w
Special to The Tribune.

OGDEN, March l1.-The
pended by the State OF IN.
mcnt of bounty charges In
In the year 1904 was sl2. als &
year 1895 the actual amo,,n
this county in this connec
II is true that the record sb
oiture OF $2S72, but OF that
was fraudulently extracted
treasury between Decemho,
January II. 1906. so that ~
eliminated. bounty paymem,|
Weber cost the State only Z
rod hunted as assiduouslv
as successful as In the prsv
last year he had TO prod,,|
the officials had To be SHOW
les the prevention OF fraud
or the people,
Distribution in Aueu
During the month of Al,
sum Of $50 was purlolned (
treasury, almost double 10
during the entire year OF III
discovered the glaring disc
body knew where the mor|
Ghis amount was dIstrlb,,fI
following "knowns" and q,
they may be rightly classifiI
ler. S. j. Devine, james Nil
and a. H. Conlisk. IT'S an
ord, and the responsibIIitj
where, and the figures are
the columns of The Tribunf|
aid may oe given State a
l1Cialdom in assisting the NJ
full and Just measure OF
Gilit!.
Who Passed On i
c. r. Hollingsworth. Cler|
of Weber county during
frauds were In progress' .p1
bills. and with his official
was well as far as thai 81
But the claims were A naatlI
cerned the State, and Ike 4
they passed TO tho State 4
Tingey. for his official cofnl |
pervision. Well. evidently' \
cured his official approval
allowed-the frauds were
And the question which Is
the minds and more especial
cf the taxpayers Is, Who ID
them for this enormous out
Cannot Be Held BID
So far as has been lear
Treasury has not been I'd
the frauds perpetratcd upf|
blame attaches to thu ed
cannot be escaped. but jus{
tent Is the late State Audit
gey, responsible for the de
State eXchcquer? Surely
held blameless In the mattel
as he was responsible 10 Il
the moneys OF the State, s,{
responsibility be measured
made upon these moneys. II
a pertinent one. The peopleI
ed In the answer 10 the que/
discussing the issue dallyI
must they wait for a satlsfI
Reverting to Old cd
And reverting back TO thI
the amount Weber county oI
of Utah for excess charges
nection with salaries, a sum
borhood OF 5000. some additI
this issue are opportune
The calm of the State AL
county was received by DisI
Halverson from Attorney-G
en- on March "a, 1904 RepI|
Auditor Tingey with regard
ter on May 3, 1904, District
Verson said:
"In re claim OF State Of
Weber county, / am OF the
the above claim Is barred b
of limitations. An itemized
verified, embracing all the
above claim. was by you prtI
Board OF County CommissiI
Der county on the 18th day
1902, and was by said boar
the 18th day of December,
were advised OF such actioI
day OF December, 1902. as
the reco Ids OF the board.
What Statute Prov
Section 2@l OF the Rev
OF 1898 provides: 'Actlons
q county, which n
jccted by the Board OF ColI
sioners, must be commence|
year. after the first reJectl0|
said board Section "a pII
limitations prescribed in
shall apply to actions bro
name or for the benefit OF
the same manner as TO acticI
parties. / shall thercfore
claim unless the Attorney-6I
to the contrary
On the same date. May 3,
what similar letter was sent
General Breeder. with
The claim was properly
and rejected by
a year ago last January, betI
the claim.
Still Holds the Cl
District Attorney Halverr<
the claim, so he states, ne
the contrary having been
The Acknowledgement.
initiated nnd bcniGhted
pears that the claim. unreI
now outlawed. was outlaws
Halverson received II for
And again arises the que
responsible for this lawless
expenditure of the people.s
t the Board of County "
he State Auditoreo the
,ral. or a combination or tnt
10 not let IL escape the pun
he sum lost 10 the state
,mount approXimating $a%
ar amount was expended
he taxpayers OF Weber 81
And all is now outlawed.
:. ,,r NfTl,ot nTnKT aITlIIle| U