The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1912-05-14

ence to county claims, was passed up
on by the supreme court in Bank VS..
Goodwin, 81 S. c., 427. There the court
said: There are very strong practical
reasons of public policy for regarding
the enactment mandatory and not di-
rectory. The items and oath are re-
quired not only that the county boards
of commissioners Tin this case the gov
ernor) may be satisfied with the ac-
count, but that the board and its sue
cessors in Office, Gin this case the
comptroller general and legislative ex-
aminating committees) as we'll as the
grand jury and the citizens at large
may, by examination of the claims, as
certain how the affairs Of the county
Gin this case of the State) have been
conducted. If it be within the power
of the county board of commissioners
(here we may say of the goVernor) to
audit and approve claims not made
out with items and veri1cation, 1t
would be within their power to allow
claims so made out as to give no infor-
nation as to their origin and charac-
ter, and thus keep those officially con-
cerned for the welfare of the county
Tin this instance, of the State) and the
citizens generally in complete ignor-
ance of the management of public
works and appropriation of the pub
lie revenue" p 429 and 431.
Again the court there said: "In de-
teranining whether the claims were
itemized and verified as required by
law, substantial, and not technical and
precise compliance with the letter OF
the statute should be the test.
To itemize an account means to state
in detail the particulars of it, so that
he account may be examined and its
correctness tested" (This means not
only by the governor, but also by the
comptroller general, before he issues
his warrant on the State treasurer,
and subsequently by the legislative
committees and citizens generalIy)
when merely the different articles
furnished or the different services rem
dered are set down without dates, one
of the most important particulars nee
essary to the examination of the ac-
count is omitted. Especially is this
true when the board whose duty it is
to examine into the correctness Of the
account is limited to the considera-
ton of claims arising within the cur
rent or preceding year."
Mr.. Creightons account simply
states: For special services render
ed for one month ending April o.,
1912" This does not specify the par
ticular services, or the particular dates
when rendered, and neither the comp
troller general nor examining commit
tee could ascertain from this for what
the money is to be paid.
1 have no desire whatever to ham
per any officer in the enforcement OF
law or performance of his duties. But
I was elected on the platform that
public office is a public trust" and
public officials should be held to a
rigid accountability for public funds"
I therefore request that Mr.. Creigh-
tons account be so itemized as to let
me know for what particular services
he is being paid, in order that the
matter may be properly examined into.
This has always been the practice OF
this Office, and of the governors Office
previous to your administration. If
this has been varied during your ad-
ministration it has been through in
advertence.
Respectfully yours,
A. w Jones,