Atlanta Georgian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1912-1939, 1914-01-09
SMITH EXPLAINS
1878 EXPENSES
Of COUNTY
Chairman Says Increase Is Less
Than $5O,0O0-Vast Sum Is
Spent on New Courthouse,

Notwithstanding the county's rapid
growth the past year and the fact
that more work was done than In any
other one year in the county's his
general work and maintenance Of de-
partments show an increase Of less
than $4,000 over those Of 1912. as
pointed out by Shelby Smith, 1918
chairman OF the board
The statement has been published
by one Of the Atlanta papers that the
countys expenses for 1918 were $I31,-
310.01 greater than those for the year
preceding. and Mr. Smith states that
this assertion is calculated to prove
misleading without the proper ex-
PLANTATION that should have accompa-
MED II to make the situation clear.
Discussing the matter and showing
wherein the County's expenses can
not be said to have increased by any
such amount, former Chairman smith
made this statement:
Spent on Courthouse.
I'm the FIRST place. during 1912 only
$160,5l69C was spent on the new
courthouse, while the amount ex-
pended on this building in 1918 was
$500, 041.19, an increase in the latter
year of S34S4S423 This is n special
and not a general expenditure, anu
can not properly he considered in the
county's general expenses. This eX-
pense was met by the additional tax
levy of two mills, the entire amount
so raised going TO pay for work on
the new courthouse
an the next place the statement or
the county's disbursements shows the
repayment of a loan of $243,425, made
in 1918 This money was borrowed
to put into the new courthouse and
meet other county bills, until the tax
money could he gotten in, and as 1t
was so used. its repayment can not
properly be charged as an additional
expense upon the county. 1t was a
disbursement but not an expense.
Loan Carried Over.
Attention might also be called to
the fact that this loan was repaid In
the year in which it was made. with
out waiting for the collection of taxes
in the early part of the new year, as
has very often been the custom. This
is indicated by the fact that loan of
SOS 600 made in 1912. was brought
over to 1918 when il was paid, also
adding that amount TO the 1913 dis
bursements
Again, materials purchased from
the Standard oil Company, the Bar
Der Asphalt Company. Texas Com
pany, Warren Brothers Company and
s e. Finley in 1912. and aggregating
45.065.S9. had to be paid for In 1913,
still further increasing the disburse-
ments for that year.
'To recapitulate, the additional
disbursements made in 1913 which
are not properly chargeable to gen
eral expenses for 1913, are as fol-
lows:
Additional amount paid on
new courthouse .-..t.t. SSAS %
Repayment of 1912 loan. 100000
Reoayment of 1918 loan. 243, 42500
Materials purchased during
1912 paid for in 19l3.... 45,065.S9
Total ...................S 1861 ,s7511
Actual Increase Shown.
"Deducting the foregoing total from
the aforementioned increase OF $751;,
s10.01, we have left an increase of
only $50, $780, as compared with
1912 and to arrive at an accurate
comparison there should still further
be deducted the expense OF erecting
two main buildings at the home for
lncorrigible women, the purchase of
four motor trucks the expense Of the
health and purchasing departments
added during 1918 the expense Of es-
tablishing one additional Superior
Court and the Municipal Court, rs
well as some others which are either
new expenses entirely or which can
not be considered under the head OF
general expenses
at will be apparent from the fore
going, as ! have stated, that the &C
tual increase in the general expenses
of the county for 1918 over 1912, VIII
come considera bly, undsr $4,000, not
withstanding the county's growth
and the largely increased amount of
general work.
in view OF the impression which
might be created as a result of the
statements referred to. feel that this
explanation should be made in jus
tce to myself and the other members
of the Board of County Commission
ers."