The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1907-01-15
Abolishing Office of
County Treasurer.

SOuiIly IICdSuIc Ct.
The ST. Petersburg Independent is
one OF the papers that oppose the
adjustment of the county tre1surer's
Office, and its argument put forth, il
such can be called argument, is along
the same line as that pursued oy most
CT those who are unfayorable to the
proposition.
Tho Independent seems to base its
objections on three grounds. First,
that there would be a cfamor by the
different banks for the money, and an
election would he necessary to deter
mine the county depository; second.
that 1T would be unconstitutional to
abolish this Office without adopting an
amendment to the constitution; third
that the tax payers are not grooming
under the burden Of the treasurers'
fees.
In answering the first objection if
VIII only be necessary to call atten-
ton to the part these banks now take
IN the selection of this particular
offlcer. In the larger counties the de-
pos1ts, which are made under the di-
rection of the treasurer, are valuable
assets in banks business, and there
IS never an election passes but what
the different banks, and their friends.
are found lined up for one or another
OF the candidates for county treas
urer- And it is safe to predict that
every candidate for this office makes
definite promises as to where this
money shall be kept far in advance of
his election. There is no wav tn rom
ecy this matter under the present sys-
tenn, and certainly the adjustment of
the office would not make it any
worse. 1t would be far better for the
people to designate, by ballot, the
banking institution in which the
funds of the county should be kent
than for one man to do so. II the
matter were left to the people there
would be no question but what the
strongest and soundest institution
would be selected as the guardian of
the county's funds.
1t is not necessary to notice the second
objection, because no one would think
OF trying to change a provision OF
our organic law without amending the
constitution in the manner prescribed
By Law.
the Independent says that constitu-
ional amendments are not popular in |
Florida, and this comes nearer the
truth than any statement in the arti- |
ucle. in the recent election il is |
true that all the proposed constitu-
tioEai amendments were defeated. bat |
this Is the first time that such a thing
has happened in many years. if ever
before, and 1t can not be said that !
the people meant by this vote that |
they did not intend ever to change the
instrument again If it can be clear
ly shown that the abolishment of
this Office would be to the interests of
the people We believe they would rati-
fy such proposed amendment
The third objection. that the TAX
payers are not groaning under the
burden of the treasurer's fees, would
seem to argyle that the people should
never make kick about anything I'D
I'll 1t becomes CnbeSrable. Of course
the people are not "sroaning under
the burden of the treasurers' fees
FOR II they had been the Office would
have been abolished, or the fees re.
1aeed, before this late day. 1t is not
question OF burdening the people with :
these fees, but 4 question Of saving"
hem for the people in a case where
20 do so the county would run no
more risks. and be put to no addi- !
icnal trouble or expense.
The Independent says: with a
$4,000 bond to protect the money !
md . man whose honesty is ten times
-Teateg than his bond, the tax payers Z
eel pretty secure in the premises" 5
Perhaps they 90, but why wouldn't
hey feel Just as secure with Ike
.Ond from the tax collector. or any
'ther officer whose duty it would re 7
o handle these funds? Certainly S
here can be no difference between v
ne county officer and another when II Q
ONES to the question of his oficia! ),
ond
The statement that the treasurer II
nth bond to protect the money. and
man whose honesty is ten times
reater than his bond is misleading n
the Independent doac ro+ .
uoes not b
dVocate trusting a man with these o.