The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-02-08

He or his associates. has a patent or
copyright on this system The books
in sets are said to cost somewhere in
the neighborhood of $50 each Now
Mr. Nation wants the state to buy
these 1t is estimated that each coun-
" Will require two sets and there are
los counties This means that the
state of Kansas would have to pay
$52,5O0 for what would cost Mr. Ma
ton and his associates S1O,50O- The
question arises, Who is the CRATER
kansas can feel pretty safe in tying
10 the recommendations of State
Treasurer TulIey. Montgomery will
give him a clean bill any time he
needs it."
Part of the above statement is unfair
10 Mr. Nation The copyrighted books
referred to are undoubtedly the Cation
records for county officials. and have
already been introduced in many coun-
ties Those books assuredly stand
on their merits regardless of any new
system of accounting.
The people of the state of Kansas are
most vitality interested in a change of
the methods of accounting which will
stop gratis IN state Offices 1t Is to be
hoped that no hasty action will be ia
ken by the committee on state affairs
until il is thoroughly convinced of the
best measure TO report. While the
Helmick bill has the endorsement Of SO
good man as Auditor Nation. and the
informed. experienced people who say
the bill has its faults and flaws. Some
sUbstitutiOns and important changes
may be necessary before a bill as near
" perfect as possible may be presented
for action. The committee thus owes it
to itself and TO the state to get all pos
sible information Indeed. it is said,
that the committee has already defer
red action on account of some doubts
OF the wisdom of several features of
the He1nick bill
There is grave criticism of the plan
requiring the state treasurer to make
drafts on the county clerks and the
provision in the HeImick bill which
makes the drawing of the draft the
same as the actual receipt of the
money As the bin provides the day
the state treasurer should make a
draft On the county. that day the
money is considered available in the
state treasury for use of the state
school fund commissioners in purchas-
ing bonds as well as for use in other
respects. the same as il the cash had
been actually received or placed TO the
credit OF the state treasurer II there
should be any error or failure in any
of these drafts it is plain that the
actual funds would not be available
and in that event the bill says the
bondsmen OF the county officials
should be looked to for the payment
Of the money! plain admission that
a draft on q county officer is not the
same as q cash item until the draft be
collected. or the money placed to the
states credit
II is also claimed that there are
many opportunities for graft which a
measure of this kind should prevent.
The bill provides for monthly settle
ments from state officers to the treas
urer and auditor Why not daily set
Elements. and why should not the gov
ernor have before him every day an
account of the receipts and disburse-
ments Of the various departments OF
the state. so far as practicable, the
same as the heads of departments Of
large business concerns make in their
daily reports It is declared that this
bill to a large extent shifts response
biity from the state treasurer to the
state auditor. and that that is one OF
the principal reasons for certain objec-
items On the part OF State Treasurer
Tully.
It is understood that certain impor-
tant defects in the Helmfck bill have
been pointed out to the governor. and
! that under this measure the governor