The comet. (Johnson City, Tenn.) 1884-1916, 1906-03-01
FRANK DIBRELL,
= Comptroller.

1t will be remembered that in the
Legislative committees report set out
above occurs the following: "We report
that Mr.. Cox was not entitled to retain
anything whatever out of the $3.50 or
the $1s5, 90 paid to him by Mr.. Poin-
dexter, and that the sum so retained
should be paid by Mr.. Cox into the
treasurer's office for the credit of Mr..
Poindexter, and Mr.. Cox admitted be-
fore the committee that Mr.. Poindexter
was not liable for and ought not to pay
any commissions on the taxes of 1896. !"
AS appears, however, from Comptroller
Dibrells letter, set out above, Cox has
never paid this amount into the state
treasury, and Mr.. Poindexter is still
charged with these amounts on the
comptrOller's books. At the time of
these payments to Cox and from that
time up to the present time, the Fidel-
ity Deposit and Trust Co. of Baltimore
is Mr.. Poindexter's surety for state
revenue. The company Investigated
the merits of the controversy between
Cox and Poindexter as to the commits
sions deducted by Cox, and with which
Poindexter is now charged on the
comptroller's books, and evidently
came to the conclusion that Poindexter
was not liable for this amount, as ever
since that time the company has renew
ed his bond as his surety. IT is nnnec-
essary to state that wellknown surety
companies don't execute bonds for
trustees who in reality are delinquent.
The facts so clearly appear from the
foregoing correspondence between
Comptroller Dibrell and Senator A. W.
Ewing that no comment, at this time,
is deemed necessary.
In order to make entirely clear that
portion Of the above letter referred to
in questions one, two, three and four,
wherein it appears that Cox drew $500
in mis- Office of state revenue agent three
months befofe he had made his bond
or qualified in said office and which
$500 he did not pay back to the state
until December 81, twenty
months after he had unlawfully with
drawn this money on the eve of the
meeting of the legislature of 1899 which
investigated Cox-we give the provi-
sions of the law in force at the time
"They Ii. 9 state revenue agents. shall
be entitled to their actual travelling ex-
penses, not exceeding five hundred
dollars per annum, itemized and sworn
to, and paid upon warrant of the comp
troller, which shall be refunded to the
state when their compensation aggre-
gates one thousand dollars per annum.
(Acts of Tennessee, 1897, sec. SO, page
AZ, |. c
James Harris while comptroller kept
no account with Cox. Therefore Cox
had no account on the books of the
state showing that he had received $500
of the states money and for which he
was accountable to the state.
Although the law directed that Cox
should refund said $500 when his com.
pensation aggregated $1,000 per an.
uum, Cox did not refund it until near
ly two years thereafter, and yet during
this time Cox's compensation from of.
icials and the state aggregated 3d.
S47. % (see Appendix, House and Senate
Journals, $780, y. 1349.)
The time when Cox paid this money
back is very significant December 81,
lS96-the eve of the assembling of the
legislature of 1899. The numerous
complaints against Cox from all parts
Of the state showed clearly that both
Cox and his Office would be Investigate
ed and possibly thoroughly investigat.