Amador ledger., 1909-04-30

OdOh HuOulu TBtuIu W bub SOuhbJf ="
was found impossible to determine
how much of the work had been done
each month. | therefore, took the
average of the total amount of the
work done in the five months, namely
1902. 40 per month, multiplied this by
81 the number of months employed
on indexing up to Januaiy I, 1907,
which gave total of $685. 80. OF this
amount one-third, or S327.60 should
belong to Bruce Burleston as per the
terms of his agreement with j. 3.
Jack, the remaining two-thirds, or
sos. 20 should be returned to the
county by j. s. Jack.
10 1t will also be noted that the price
paid for said indexing, namely, an aver
age of $500. 40 per month, which work
was performed by youth of about
10 years, is exorbtant and out OF all
reason tsthe services performed and
a price of two cents a name would
work to be done.
II. These facts and figures were duly
presented to board of supervisors at
the several meetings of the board
held in the months of March, April
and May of the present year.
II. j s Jack at first resented any
idea of wrong intention on his part,
claiming that he was entitled to the
money by virtue of the resolution of
the board and that he did not make
any money out of his office. lie
afterwards, however, receded from
this position and, after making
several propositions which | rel ected,
stated that he did not agree with my
figures and considered he only owed
the county s400 OO but offered to
compromise the matter by returning
$500 90 to the county, and to be al
lowed to finish the work at the same
rate as stated in the resolution of the
board.
Ii This offer was submit to the
board by him and by them accepted.
IA With the consent of the board,
the return of the 5000 10 was accom-
plIshed by deducting $500 % from the
sum of $500 40 still due OH completed
work, and allowing j. S. Jack a
claim for Sl99 40 as per warrant No.
l1ll2 of June, 1907. in full for all ser
vices on mining records up to date.
these transactions, however, do not
appear on the minutes of the board.
On the same day of the above COM
promise the Eoard of supervisors en-
tered into an agreement with j. s.
Jack, at his request, whereby he was
to continue the work of indexing the
mining records of the county at the
same rate as in the first resolution.
JAMES KEIIH,
District Attorney.
From this report it appears that j.
s. Jack the county recorder of this
county was authorized to secure the
services of some person to do certain
work for the county at an agreed
rate, that the said j. s. Jack engaged
such person at a rate of oue-third of
the amount allowed by the super
visors for such work but that he, j.
am cunts as originally agreed on by
the board of supervisors as the COM
pensation to be paid the party doing
the work.
1t further appears that said j. S.
Jack on his attention being called to
the illegality of his act, withdrew his
demands on the county treasury for
the performance of work to the extent
of $500 90, 1t being impossible to as
certain the exact amount of money
illegally drawn in the matter. it
had ceased to be county officer, and
therefore could legally take up the
business of indexing the mining re-
cords for pay the board of supervisors
continued to allow his bills for doing
the work at the same exoIbitant rate
as fixed in the first instance viz,
cents per name, although fully aware
that said Jack had secured another
person IS services to do the same work
at one third of the price viz, one
and two-thirds cents per name and
that the person doing said work had
made over 500 NC per month, which
would show that that figure was
good and reasonable compensation.
It also seems that said j. S. Jack was
brought before the said board of