The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-05-11

Warren M. Brown questioned to- day by Alcora:
 c. You testified yesterday con- corning over-expenditures on orig final appropriations and over-ex- penditures as reported by the audi tors to the city. For the year 1881 you testified, I think, the difference between your finding and the re- port of the auditors was $171, ,709.l6?
 A. Yes.
 @. Will you explain that?
 A. According to states exhibit 107 which is report of Miller Franklin Co.,, to the city of Water bury for the year 1881, on the first page of the comments in that re- port there is noted the item: Non- revenue receipts for additional ap- propriations from special school fund, $150,000; from surplus re- sources sinking fund, $21, ,709.16-the total of the non-revenue receipts being $17l ,709.16. The journal vouch- CT No. 308, dated December 31, 1881, transfers cash from the special school fund to various accounts in the first and second districts; the explanation appearing on that jour- nal voucher is "Over-drafts of gen. eral funds of first and second dis tricts transferred to special school fund; see B. of Aldermen, 12-31- 31." Journal voucher No. 309, dated 12-31-31 transfers cash from the surplus resource sinking fund to cash of general fund in the amount of $21 ,709.16. The eXplanatio being "see B. of Sinking Fund Commis- sioners, dated 12-30-31." In connec- tion with the transfer from the sur- plus resource sinking fund, I wish to call attention to states exhibit 54, charter of the city of Water bury, section 99, which is entitled: Purpose for which said funds may be used" The last sentence of that section reads: "No appropria- tion shall be made from the surplus resource sinking fund to pay current expenses during any fiscal year"
 Q. The. transfer was for what purpose?
 A. To pay expenses of the gen. eral fund.
 Q. Current expenses?
 Diversions
 A. Current expenses. Section 312 of the charter entitled Special Funds" and reads ar follows: All moneys set aside for special pur- poses which remain unexpended on December 31 1881 shall accrue in the general treasury of the city of Waterbury, except money set aside for the street improvement fund, park fund, sewer fund, unexpended balance remaining from the selling of bonds, surplus resorce sinking funds and trust funds donated to the city and set apart for special purposes of such trusts" Those two items therefore represent diver sionS.
 Again referring to states exhibit 107, the auditors report, on exhibit 6 of that report there is given a statement of operation of the surplus resource sinking fund and under the expenditures listed in that statement, there is the item to in- crease appropriations of the gen. eral fund-1931 courrent account $21, ,709.l6; the auditors therefore &C., cepting this diversion from the sur plus resource sinking fund to the special school as an addition.
 o. Will you make similar ex- planation with respect to 1882 where the auditors employed by the city show over-expenditures $297 396.22. The general finding is that there was $550, ,283.54.
 Over Expenditures
 A. The over expenditures as shown by the auditors report for the year 1892 is the difference rep resenting $252, 2,887.28. As shown on the auditors report reading: Non- revenue receipts for additional reve- nue from special school fund, $125,- 900; from surplus resource sinking fund, $l27, ,887. 7.28-the two items to- taling $252,887.28 which is the diff ference referred to. Voucher 226 dated December 31, 1892 transfers cash from the surplus resource sink ing fund to the general fund, the explanation being: To record trans fers of cash from the surplus re- source sinking fund, second district; increased general fund, first district appropriation-by the board of sink ing fund commissioners-see copy of vote attached; the amount of the transfer is $127,887.28. The copy of the attached vote is dated December 28, 1892. Honorable Board of Sink ing Fund Commissioners-Gentle- men: I hereby recommend that the surplus resource sinking fund be charged to the following items: Ac- count of employees of the city of Wa terbury, $556.50 (which item is crossed out in lead penciD compen- sation, $25, 5,758.s4: legal department costs, including damages and re- wards, 9,975.23 penalty and in- terest on state taxes, $4,515.07; in- terest on floating debt, $40,245.17; interest on bonded debt, 27,992.87; Memorial Day expenses, $100-Re- spectfully submitted, Daniel J. Leary. Referring to the account in the appropriation ledger for 1892 enti- tied: "City Controller" er"-Compensa- tion-various items of expenditures have been charged in that account throughout the entire year of 1882. AS to December 3l, the total amount that had been expended is $28, ,343.80. 1885.
 The first, for $10,000, bore nota- ton of a letter, from John P. Fitz- m a ,s,.ica tN T.aarv advising him Of