Amador ledger. (Jackson, Amador County, Calif.) 1875-19??, 1910-04-15
THAT EXPERTS REPORT.

The experts report the books of county officials which
was published exclusively in full in the Ledger last week.
remarkable for its shortcomings of omission than
of commission. be conceded that the expert has
made pretty thorough examination of the receipts
and disbursements in the various branches of the county
shown the face of the account books of the
respective officials His search evidently aimed the dis
covery of clerical inaccuracies oversghts which almost
sure be found any complex bookkeeping and which do
involve Intentional ngdoing Such mistakes
pected nseparabe from human endeavo Where nothing
than such clerical irregularities expected be
unarthed the proposition of uncoverng them is losing
game from the standpoint of the taxpayers The experience
have Just had in the expert business emphatic illus
traon of this point Fifteen months have been consumed
the makeup of the document presented the board of
supervisors this month"; and the total COST SIS per diem
has run up the neghborhood of $1,000 The
Of against the county of $685. and in
favor of the county $43o3 From this it appears that
settlement is had and the pro and of the
squared the county will be the gamer of $24 6exclu
sive of the of the experts per diem In other Words
it about $1,000 collect $2465 outlay of about
$50 for every dollar recovered Now if this lopsded result
included the entire field that ought be covered by report
of this character order to the people that public
have been fully saeguarded by official conduct dur
ing the four years under investigation would not be such
proposition after ALL 1t is sometimes sound business
take 50 risk to find out that ones affairs
good shape But the report in question carries
such satisfactory mpression the contrary it conveys
impression that there is something wrong from legal
viewpoint Indeed expressly stated that many bills have
been allowed and paid that properly itemzda
very serious charge. This is nothing has been
ventilated in the columns of the Ledger time and again
the part is that the report fails
details concerning these defective and improperly allowed
claims. Not sample claim is cited, nothing but genera
cation INDUCED and the taxpayers who the
experts per diem left in the dark who the
of FAM To have
subject would have had wholesome effect upon
county affairs that is hardly possible overesmate The
lead followed might have widened into bonanza proper
tons throwing into the shade the clerical discrepancies cited
in the report Perhaps the acted in accordance with
instructions the scope of his Investigations. Be that
may the report stops short the threshold of the
fertile territory Taxpayers would like know from
official whether items have been charged in accordance
with the of existing contracts rates which mat
of records Garng instances of overcharges have been
pointed at different times charging that graft far
being unknown science i'll the affairs of local govern
ment But such delicate topics ignored entirely else
hppanty dismissed with the remark about claims not being
properly itemzed verified.
This dose of exporting" is certainly the limit The
demand bread has been answered by the pror of
And in this expression of opinion say
vocng verdict of nneenhs of the taxpayers In face
of this erng away of public funds, it is high time the
employment of expert fenced around with stringent
laws defining its scope the time be occupied by the
pert and the limit of he shall receive according
to population directly concerned by the investigation