Judsonia weekly advance., 1915-07-21

not within our authority to interpret or enforce the criminal staute of the state, but merely call your attention to the conditions as they are and quote you the law bearing on these violations, leaving the public to de mand of the proper authority such ac- tion as the law demands.
 This committee having learned early in it's labor that it was the GUS tom of some of the state officials to be very careless in keeping correct accounting of all the moneys received, 1t took the precaution to go beyond the records in the office where the ac- countants were at work and find from the sources of revenue whether or not a record of all such receipts was made in the respective offices. This com mittee has obtained from the probate records of each county of the state, with the exception of some seven or eight who failed to reply to our in- quiry, the amount of the inheritance tax settlements, as shown by the pro bate records and given us by the re- spective county and probate clerks.
 $9,995 Not Accounted For.
 "We find from the probate records that the attorney general has failed to turn into the treasury $23,639.97 that has been decreed by the said court. Upon calling the attorney generals at tention to this fact, and to the fact that his special counsel in the collec- tion of these taxes in Garland county had failed to turn in $1,214.99 of this amount, the attorney general yester- day sent for this attorney and col lected the entire amount due from that county and turned it into the treasury. The attorney general also informs us that SIC, ,190 that has been decreed in Sebastian county and should have been paid into the treas ury some months ago, has not yet been collected, because they are in sisting upon him taking state war rants for the amount. Deducting the amount paid from Garland coun- ty and the $10190 from Sebastian y there is still a balance of $12,231 98 not accounted for. As previously stat ed, the attorney general has to his credit in the Southern Trust Company S2 ,23696, which he thought an over plus, or more than he really needed to square himself with the treasury. Deducting this from the amount not accounted for leaves $9,995.02 due the state of Arkansas, for which he has no accounting in his office and which shortage he has been unable to ex- plain.
 Employed Counsel Unnecessarily.
 We further note that the attorney general employed special counsel to collect the franchise taxes against the St. Louis Southwestern Railway Com pany for 1911. We find from the de cree from the Pulaski Chancery Court that it was agreed by counsel for the railroad and state that the railroad would abide by the result of this suit for the 1911 and subsequent taxes. The case was carried to the Supreme Court of the United States and was decided to be constitutional, and the 20 per cent attorney fee allowed by law in said suit amounted to $2, ,093. .56, yet the attorney general of the state allowed special counsel to file similar suit for the taxes of 1912, 1913 and 1914, which were paid by order of the Chancery Court under agreement by the counsel for the railroad and spe- cial counsel for the state, and without any contest whatever, and the same 20 per cent attorney fee was allowed said special counsel, amounting to the sum of $7298.46. While it was abso lutely unnecessary to file the subse quent suit, as the railroad had agreed to abide by the results of the formel suit in the collection of all subse quent taxes, yet if the attorney gen eral insisted that suits must be filed we say that he should have done this himself, as it would have been but a few hours work at most to do all that was done, and he could have saved the state the lawyers fees, amounting to $7,298.46. Truly, the love of money seems to be the root of all evil
 Dealings in State Warrants.
 There seems to be no law against state officials dealing in state war rants, yet it is unquestionably a rep rehensible practice and detrimental to the states welfare, because it has tendency to keep down the price of warrants. The attorney general ad- mits to us that he has purchased and furnished to the Iron Mountain rail road $6,500 in state warrants. It should be borne in mind that while the attorney general was helping the Iron Mountain railroad to get cheap state paper to pay their taxes, he is constantly called upon in his official capacity to oppose the railroad in protecting the states interest This may not be legally wrong, but is it morally right, and is it possible that the attorney general is an exception to the statement in Holy Writ, You cannot serve two masters?'