The Aberdeen weekly. [volume] (Aberdeen, Miss.) 1878-1933, 1921-10-14
Is the Salary Law to Blame?

public opinion. The change from
the old to the new system in the
payment of salaries to county Off
cials is held "a the principal cause
of existing high taxes by those who
have not thought to the bottom Of
the matter.
The financial reports published
and certified by the sheriff and
chancery CLERK of Monroe county
do not furnish incontrOvertible evi.
dence that the salary law alone has
brought the existing high taxation
to the people.
In his report for the fiscal year
1920. which was published in this
paper Sept. Is. Sheriff J. B. Lewis,
of Monroe county. stated that his
final accounting for fees. commits
sione and emoluments of the sher-
ifs office. which under the fee sys-
tenn the sheriff pocketed," and
which were paid into the county
treasury and out of which the .sala-
ries of himself, his deputies and
special help during the tax collect
ing season were paid, exceeded by
| approximately So, 100 SO the amount
paid to himself and his salaried as
sistants.
The financial report of Chancery
Clerk J. T. Morgan covering the
same period and published in the
Weekly Sept. 30, says: The ex'
penditures for per diem ex-officio
service, etc., to the sheriff, chancery
and circuit clerks is not really paid
to them. but are allowances made
to their respective offices, which
are paid back into the county treas
ury just az other fees and commits
sions are collected and accounted
for by the respective officers. :"
1t is impossible to state accu-
rately the amount earned by the
three offices referred to because of
the fact that court costs are not
paid in advance; the law not re-
quiring the same, and many of the
legitimate cases and estates and
guardianship matters. in which
there are accommodations of costs
earned during the above period
were not settled during this time. "
This report shows that during
the year 1920 the chancery clerk
and his deputies. including the
clerks per diem and ex-officio SER
vices az county auditor. received
out OF the county treasury So ,054 A;
the sheriff, deputies and per diem
SO, 1903 13; the circuit clerk. deputy
and ex-officio services SD SCI .55;
the five supervisors So 1923 10; su-
perintendent of education 50 ,262 95;
the tax assessor and deputies 81,
88498; the county attorney 81. 100.
90 and attorneys for the board of
supervisors S424 90, aggregating in
salaries paid the above officials
S32, 250.15. The salary of county
health officer and sanitary expense
added to this foots up S36,571.
Mr.. Morgan concludes his report
with the following: The salary
law does not save to the county
any revenue, nor does the system
give satisfaction, and the sooner
the legislature returns to the old
system the better for all concern
ed"
The Weekly does not know
whether it agrees with the above
opinion of Mr.. Morgan or not. The
facts brought out by the two pub
lished reports are too indeterminate
to state any belief positively wheth-
er or not the salary law or the fee
system of providing compensation
for county officials would be more
economical for the people. 1t is
obvious. however. that the salaries
of county officials as fixed by the
legislature of 1920 are far in excess
of compensation paid talent for SIM
liar service by the private businesses
of life. Reasoning from this view
point, it would appear that the sal |
aries fixed for county officers by the
Legislature of 1920. perhaps. is
more to blame for dissatisfaction
among the people anent these sala-
ries than is the system under which
they are paid. 1t would seem OBJ
vious to the legislature. then, when
it assemblies in 1922. that it would
be informed thoroughly as to the
.o~o~.%sxva ,,oarsfo of the fuo cuc |