Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1913-03-07

| the sub-vOuchcrs in excess of the thOus-
and dollars. ..
Tuesday morning, clerks connected
with the commissioners and auditors Of
fees made an examination of the vouch-
er AID sub-vouchers on file in the audi
tors office and found a voucher, which
read as follows: -' ~
r. July 3lst, 1909.
State Of North Dakota. Or.
70 Melvin G.. Hagen.
Expenses with exhibit .......... 81 80
Services with exhibit ......... 500 6
.. IT,. '''' $l24.S so
Su%b-vouchers to the amount of S74.SO
were filed, covering the expenses cntailed
in making the exhibit. and the $4,000 was
the amount allowed for his expenses dur
ing the ten days he was in charge Of
the exhibit which went to the Grand
Forks state fair. In itemiZing and adding
the several vouchers and ~sub-vOuchers
which made up the $1,O76. SO, the sub
vouchers for the $3.50 were included as
well as the charge for Expenses with
exhibit, $780,. making a total debit
of S2f9.6c, when as a matter of act the
sub-vouchers should have been omitted
and only the voucher for $l24.S0 charged.
The fact that this voucher and the sub
vouchers had passed through several
hands in my department., through the
state auditing board, and then checked
over by the lynx-eyed deputy auditor
or his capable assistants and the error
not detected seems almost incredible.
| wish, however, to state that this dis
crepancy was promptly corrected and
the $74.S0 peacefully rests within the
vault of the state tr%easurer's office.
During the past four years L have been
personally responsible for the .disburse-
ment Of. approximately, two hundred
thousand dollars. a great part of which
sum was handled by. persons other than,
myself who had been entrusted with
this responsibility, but who had to ac-
count to me for the proper expenditure.
This involved considerable detail work
and complex bookkeeping. Yet. after
W weeks of diligent research and rigid
investigation, but one solitary clerical err
ror las been discovered. Can any state
or national bank iii North Dakota show
as exc client a record? "
Quoting from the report:
1.-THE examiner has also called atten-
ton to the following items, shown on
pages Nos. So and SO OF the official re-
port covering the same period: 1910.
Sept. l. 1910, \. +. Noble, grain
prize '........... ............ ; 3O.OO
Sept. 3. 1910. p. w. Verdium, crop
report, ........ .............. 500
postage ............ ............ ~ So
Sept. %, 1910, .Puckbee- Mears, half
tones ............ ...... ....... 1914
Iotal ........... ......,.....$102 90
These same items are shown on page
1 of the biennial report for the term
ending December 31st. 1912, as expendi-
lures Of that year. Their" Is a differ
ence in the dates of two OF items, but
only one set Of vouchers is found to
cover the same and the amounts Of the
items are Identical. 1t would appear,
therefore, that the promotion Of immi-
6iAlIoh Iullu IlS ucCu CuIIScu TWICE. Win
the amount Of these items.'
The concluding sentence is u%nfoundcd
and unwarranted, as an examination Of
the vouchers in the auditors Office will
disclose. 1 herewith submit the state
ment of the state auditor:
i March 5th, 1918.
Mr.. W. c. Gilbreath.
Comm. Agri. & Labor,
Bismarck, n d.
Answering YOU inquiry will, say that
four items. as follows: Noble, $50. 90.
Verdium, $500, Patterson. $23.56 and
Buckbee-Mears, $4O.l4. amounting in to-
tai to $1,000, were paid by the state
check No. 9941S4. which COW
cred in total $706.S1 worth Of vouchers
paid by you for immigration purposes.
I do not find our records show pay
ment twice Of the above Items.
Yours truly, Y
Carl o. Jorgcnson,
State Auditor"
Before the close of the. biennial period
Of 1910 there We're a number Of vouchers |
paid by me, that were not turned over
w SAS q uaAICO SIt!IOIlS StlcIU DSluS |
those that have been; mentioned. These
were listed in the 1910 report (Which
made in November, 1910, but sub
sequent!y.. other vouchers: were, tsnbsti-
tuted for them and the fund for tile
years 1909 and 1910 was properly closed
will be seen by an examination Of
The auditors and treasurer's books. The
reason that the four items were not
in to the auditor at the close Of
the BIENNIAL year $780, was because
here were other vouchers which, could
De used to make the account balance. in]
is entirety, which like these four items
rad been paid by me. There was but
me set of vouchers, and that they were
duplicated in the published report, does
not follow they were paid twice, but
IN the contrary, the records Of the aud
tors office show that they were paid. but
'nce, which statement is corroborated by
The state auditor.
The receipts and expenditures OF the