The Greenville journal. [volume] (Greenville, Ohio) 1850-1918, 1907-04-04

pointed to examine the Annual Report of
| the County Commissioners OF Darke Coun-
| ty, Deg leave TO submit the following re.
| port.
| | agree with your committee relative to
| the items OF expenditures made on authori.
| W or allowance OF seid Commissioners, and
| that they tally with the bills allowed; and
| that the system OF handling claims against
the county prac tlced by the Board, ana the
| general method OF business adopted by the
| Board in It's transactions with the public,
| deserves conn endatton. Also relative to
| the contracts for labor and material furn-
| iShed to the county, D eing specific in detail
| and proper In form.
| l wish to further state that considering
| the area OF this cou nty, the population and
wealth, and the enormous auount of busl-
| neAs neceS arily trans acted from year to
year, do not believe there is another coun.
| ty in the State of Ohio where the bu. mess
| - transacted In more ecOnOm ical and
bu sin eSs-like manner.
| l wish TO call the attention OF the court,
| however, to only II few OF the many crti :
clsnS whicu we're made by your con- mittee,
| and which criticisms, believe, were n the
| main unjust and un called for.
| For instance, the increased allowance to
| the Sheriff on account OF boarding prisoners
from sixty cents per day, to sixCyfve cents
per day. No reasonable person would say
that SlxtyhVe cents per day for boarding
prlso ler> Is excessive Furthermore, when
this allowance was increased to SixtyhVe
per Gay, the sheriff wOs required to pay the
entire barber bill of prisoners from his own
personal funds.
The allowance to the Probate Judge, under
the statute, for services in criminal cases of
S25OOO and $4,000 per year, was not ex xcessIye;
In fact, this allowance was below the aver.
hge allowance made for the past fifteen
years and longer tor similar services per.
formed by his predec essors; all of which
the committee we'll knew.
The criticism of the Comml Ssio nsrs In
purchasing blanks for administrators, and
guardlan's accounts, bonds, applications,
schedules, petitions and notices, ETC., for the
Probate Judges office, should not have been
made us these blanks are necessary and
saving 10 the a&pa Yers of the county, and
especially to the widows and orphans whose
executors, administrations and guardians
would be compelled to pay some attorney
at the rate of u few dollars per blank: there
lore, think, this criticism sh OuId not have
been made,
AS the criticism as to the allowance made
by the commissioners TO the Prosecuting
Attorney Is aimed at me directly wish TO
Fay little concerning the same. The CON-
mlssioners knew The nNture and extent of
The services rendered by that otf1cer; and
recognized SAID services; and the General
Assembly of ONO at its last session also rec
ognized the services of Prosecuting Attor-
neys by materIllay increasing their salaries |
and therefore, | think said criticism should |
not heve been made.
/ wish to state further, that the officers of |
the county. Win Tue exception, perhaps, of |
part OF the Board OF Intirmary Directors, |
are following The explicit directions and
instructions of the Bureau OF Inspection
and supervision of Public Offices OF the
state OF Ohio, and which Board is appoint-
ed by the Auditor of the State, and under
the direct supervision of said Auditor and
of the Attorney General OF the state OIL
ONO; which fact was also known to your
committee. And knowing the above facts,
some OF The criticisms made by your com.
nlltee, In my opinion, were actuated rath
er by malice than by sense OF justice.
Further the Commissioners Report shouId
have been examined in from three to five
days, yet tho committee presented bills for
fourteen and seventeen days. services re-
spectiVely, and drew pay from the County
Treasury for said time at the ate of S3. w per
day; which, IN my opinion, SaVored more
II extravaganza and excessive allowance
than anything complained OF by the COM
mittee.
AS the Bureau of Inspection ana Super
vision OF Public Offices ex poets 10 visit each
county once in each year, am Of the opin-
on that the statute authorizing the an.
or committee to examine The
Report should be boIished +
The Bureau OF In> pection and Supervision I
u Public Offices being directly uDder the I
OF the Auditor OF the State, and
II the Attorney Generals Office, Is familiar
With the laws and duties governing the
county officials, and the appointment OF
= simply needless and useless expenditure
II the peoples money.
Respectfully submitted,
H. l.. IOUNr, Pr os. Atty
of narke County. Ohio.
April 4, l9O7.lw