The news and herald. (Winnsboro, S.C.) 1901-1982, July 18, 1906, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

N; PUBLISHED WEEKLY WINNSBORO, S. C. WEDNESDAY, JULY 18, 1906. ESTABLISHED 1844 On the Financial Affairs of Fairfield County. LEGAL INDEBTEDNESS $24,000; OTHER INDEBT EDNESS $4,000. Irregular Practises Condemned--No Dishonesty on Part of Officials--Important Legislation Suggested. To His Excellency, D. C. Heyward, Governor: Pursuant to the Joint Resolution of the General Assembly, entitled "A Joint Resolution to authorize the Governor to appoint a Commis sion to examine into and report the financial affairs of Fairfield County," approved the 17th day of February, 1906, we respectfully -submit our report: Under the provisions of the Resolution creating this commission, it was required, "to ascertain what the legal indebtedness of said county is and how it has been created, for what purposes, what rate of interest has been or-is being paid, and if any of said indebtedness has been in curred contrary to the provisions of the statute law," with'power to extend the examination to the past operations of this county as far as may be deemed necessary. Most of our time was devoted to the office of the County Supervisor, and necessarily so, as it is in that office, claims are audited and allowed. An expert accountant was employed, and, with his assistance, a tho rough examination was made for the fiscal years 1899, 1900,4901, 1902, 1903, 1904 and 1905, and claims approved for the present year up to the time of our investigation were also examined. Our examination, there fore, covered two years of the administration of B. G. Tennant, the four years of Supervisor A. D. Hood (Dec. 21, 1900, to Dec. 22, 1904), and the administration of J. B. Burley, the present incumbent. We are glad to report that we find no evidence of dishonesty, such as has been reported in some counties, but we find many irregularities, to which attention will hereinafter be directed. A fire occurred in the Supervisor's office in August, 1905. Many of the original claims were badly charred, and some entirely destroyed. Some time after the fire, the claims were placed in boxes, but in great confusion. We began first to arrange and systematize these papers, and check them off with the "File Books," containing all claims audited and. allowed, thus ascertaining how many had been entirely destroyed and their amounts. Comparatively few were entirely missing, and our work has, therefore, been more satisfactory than we had anticipated. Our next step was to check off all claims in the Supervisor's office by the warrants issued in payment thereof and with the Treasurer's book, with the view of ascertaining the outstanding unpaid claims, and at the ~isaetime ascertaining that the Treasurer had vouchers for his disburse ments. We had no difficulty in identifying each claim for the years 1899 and 1900, and up to the middle of 1901, with the particular'warrant drawn in its payment, but in July, 1901, the practice was adopted of issuing one warrant for the aggregate of several claims, without spt4ify ing on the warrant the particular claim, or designating in any definite way, on the face of the warrant or otherwise, the claim such warrant was in payment. Great confusion, in consequence, resulted in endeav oring to check the Supervisor's office with that of the Treasurer. Prior to July, 1901, each warrant bore the same number as the claim it paid, and, besides, it specified the number of the claim for which it was issued. Every claim for the year 1899, except the balance due on a note held by the 5Winnsboro Bank, to which reference wvill be made hereafter, was checked off as paid by warrants, as wvell as all claims for the fiscal years 1900. In the other years which our investigation covered this method~ of examination was impossible, on account of the system in issuing war-i rants as indicated above. Where a person held only one claim, his warrant specified his particular claim, gad4 warrants of this class could be identified. Generally, in such cases, the nwmber of the warrant and the claim corresponded; hence we eliminated all of these by checking with the warrant; but where a person had bought, say tweity claims, often his warrant was issued in his favor in payment of "twenty etsims/7 without specifying each of the claims. W~e, therefore, eliminated all claims that .could be identified by the warrants issued in payment of claims for the fiscal years since the adoption of the irregular practice,. and then took the aggregate of die claims for these fiscal years that could rmt be identified with the warratt drawn on account of claims for these years. and s4btracted t-he total of such unklgntified warrants fromI the total of the unidentified claims, and the result was $46.55 in excess of what purports to be tde fatal outstanding claims against the~ ggQnty, a very slight discrepancy considering the long period covered. It may be mentioned in this conisection that the present Supervisor, Mr. J. B. Burley, haying seen a practica'l demonstration of the confusion caused by the irregularity ua me system of draswing wvarrants, has, very properly, corrected it,. so that -warranuk now drawi .may ibe positively identified with tbe clais. Thue practice of atkowing so-calied discount gad apeyjp claims, with the interest or discount added by the Supervisor to the face ofti claim; presented for approval, has 'ontributed 'largeiy 4 hbe indei~d ness of the county. The sebiedules annxexed .to this report will illustrate, how this illegal system has deyeloped. We -took ech ~claim for each firca year, anid ascertajaed the &otai added to claims by 'te Supervisor in the way of dilscowat. lIn J899, in which year less than one hundred dollars worth of cams are mssing, this discount amounted to only $222.38. It was added in that year to s srertain class of claims, princi paly for extra work on the roads. While Mr. Tataggtn the then Super visor, testifies that he thought this had been don~e for several.yggrg prior to 1899, we found, upon an inspection of the claims themselves, that a far back as 1890, 1891 and 1892, they do not show it, and in the inter rening years (1892-1899), of Mr. Tennant's own administration, it is exceedingly rare to find a claim in which this was done. Mr. Tennant testified from his impressions, and not from an inspection of the record. In 1900, this- discount increased to $401.91, with less than one hundred dollars worth of claims missing for that year other than "State Case" claims, and in the latter class of claims the discount was seldom added. In 1901. it was $645.30,' with about three hundred dollars worth of claims missing other than State Case claims, and in 1902, $678.46, with about two thousand dollars worth o( claims missing other than State Cases. In 1903, with about two thousand doiitars worth of claims miss ing, this discount was $802.29, and in 1904. by wvhich tima such discount was confined to no particular class of claims, but is not included in offi about two thousand dollars worth of clainas mssing. In 1905 this dis count had increased to $1,143.10. By this system, the county has been paying in some instances as- high as 42 per cent. per annum; in other instances 28 per cent., 14 per cent., 21 per cent. and so on; in fact, prior to 1905, 8 per cent. was added to the face of the claim, so that the rate per annum would be even higher. This discount is included in the amount for which the claim is approved, and that, too, without regard as to the time of payment. As an illus tration, some are paid within three or four months after the claim is made, so that the rate per annum, in such instances, would be 28 per cent. and 21 per cent.; or 32 per cent. and 24 per cent., when 8 per cent. was added. Our own Supreme Court has decided that an approved claim does not draw interest (Holmes & Calder vs. Charleston County, 14 S. C., 146). How much less reason and authority for adding discount to claims and approving them with it included? The Courts of other jurisdictions have been particularly severe in their animadversions upon these dis count transactions, and condemned them as essentially illegal and as being inherently and highly dangerous, and likely to lead to most disas trous results, and warrants issued on account of claims including it, by which it is sought to maintain the market value of county paper at par, are void to the extent of the discount included. It is unfortunate that county paper is not at par, but the Legislature has not seen proper to delegate power to County Board of Commissioners to maintain its sell ing price at face value, by this method. Fairfield County has been borrowing from the Sinking Fund Com mission, for several years, varying from $7,200 to $7,400, and for its payment the taxes levied for the particular year in which the money is borrowed are pledged. We find that since 1900 this money has been used, almost immediately upon its receipt, for the payngient of claims for the preceding fiscal year. This money is borrowed, under authority contained in the several Supply Acts for the years covering this exami nation, and is borrowed "for court expenses, jail fees and other defi ciencies." By using this borrowed money to pay claims of the preced ing year, and that, too, for claims on which a full year's interest has already been allowed, under this discount system, not only is the already high rate of interest increased, but the treasury is thereby depleted of funds to meet current expenses. The unwisdom of such financial policy, even if it was legal, is obvious. Nearly all of the money borrowed for the present year from the Sinking Fund Commission was wholly used in payment of claims for the fiscal year 1905, held by the Young Men's Saving and Loan Association, a corporation of this State. We merely mention this as an illustration, for the practice seems to have obtained in other years. The Supply Act of 1906 (Acts, 1906, p. 190), authorized this loan for "Court expenses, jail fees and other deficiencies," and ap propriates $1,800 for past indebtedness, so that it would seem that not exceeding the amount appropriated could be so used for past indebted ness. and the same application of,all in excess of the appropriation is without statutory authority. Similar provisions are contained in the Supply Acts of other years, except for the year 1904 no specific amount is appropriated for past indebtedness. It will appear by this report that all of the indebtedness of the county except the Sinking Fund loan ($7,400) and the note held by the Winns boro Bank ($1,160.48), arose on account of claims for the fiscal years 1903, 1904 and 1905, and especially 1904. In this connection attention should be called to another irregular practice of the last three or four years. Occasionally where a person or corporation had bought a large number of claims for a given fiscal year, and the funds were insufficient to pay the debts of that year, a new claim was made in favor of such person or corporation, for the deficiency with interest added, in addition to the discount already allowed in the separate claims, and the new claim repysenting the aggregate deficiency, was carried as a claim for the current yer gcd paid out of the taxes for that year. For instance, a claim (No. 367) wa.s migdp in favor of the Merchants' Building and Loan A4ssociation1, dated May 1?th, 1.90w, ftg pqying shgrtage on last year's indebtedness, $I,000., diseaunt $86,95," making $1,086,95, and, though a debt, in fact, represented by the unpaid balances on nlumerous1. separa:e claims for the fiscal year 1901, it was carried as one single claim for 19D2, and was paid out of the taxes of 1902, on 18th March, 1903. Of course, this course of proceeding was without authority of law, to say nothing of the discount added. Similar instances might be given for the years 1902 and 1903, which amount, in effect, to applying the taxes of those years to the debts of the preceding year. In some instances, claims are not entered on the file book, subsequent to 1900, for the correct fiscal year, but we have taken the claims them selves and made up the schedule annexed for the proper fiscal year. In the fall of 1902, A. D. Hood, as County Supervisor, through W. A. Neil. as agent for the Good Rdads Machine Co., of Erie, Pa., bought certaij n masinery, and gave his note as County Supervisor for $1,769, dated sometime during taig gjrs part of the year 1903, payable Deccm ber 31st, 1903, with interest at six pev cent. An agreement is in the County Supervisor's officc, signed by W. A. Neal as agent, agreeing to renew this note from time to time for five years. It has been renewved from year to year, the last renewal being for $1,759.00, dated January 16th, 1905, payable 31st December, 1905, with interest from date at six per cent. per annum. Some conflict appears in the testimony as to whether there was a formal meeting of the Board of County Commis sioners authrn~zing this purchase, but since the County Supervisor has no authpority to borrow mgnppy, #1 fue ahsenpe of 4 statute expressly aithorizing it, and is expressly prohibited by Section 609, Code o'f Laws, 1902, from issuing any certificate of indebtedness, this note is null and void and all payments made on it, or interest paid thereon, are with out authority of law. The county now has only the plough of this road mechinery. The tractig ggjje wvas sold to a Mr. R. V. Vaughn, of Jennings, S. C., in Janpary or FebrpaarydI9h0 fe $%Q, flit ?upervisor taking his note; laut nothing was paid except $10; and the succeeding Superviser took it back and sold it for $200 cash, paying the-money over to the Treasurer. As the note is null and void we cannot report this, under the present icrcumstances, as a legal debt against the county. While the county may be liable not upon the note, but upon the original contract of pur chase. for whatever benefit received, subjct to credit for all amounts paid, whether as principal .or -interest, that question, however, must be agitid by the proper tribunal. It is certainly not now an approved claim again4- t1g ggpnty, and your Commissioners are not vested with, power to audit and allow glaim~s. The~ Winn~sboro Bank, of WInnsboro, s. e., holds a note for S1.160.46,I upon which the interest has been paid to December 1st, 1906. This note represents balance on original note for $2,548.77 for money bor rowed pursuant to a resolution of the Board of County Commissioners on 23d March, 1897, by virtue of authority contained in the Supply Act for 1897 (22 Stat., 553). This is the only outstanding debt prior to 1903. IDuring the year 1903, Mrs. J. A. Williford, of Winnsboro, through her agent. L. E. Owens, bought some county claims amounting to $897.80. Many of these claims, Mr. Owens testifies, had the discount added, and had bez purchased at different times during the year 1903. a certificate (No. 669) for an approved claim of $960.65, which repre sented the aggregate of the claims, with a year's interest. The making out and approvii a new claim, in substitution for the original claims, was unauthorized. It should be stated this new claim is not entered on the file book among the audited and approved claims. The legal debt is $8D7.80 without ir.terest. In 1904. "Mrs. I. A. Williford, through the same agent. purchased claims aggregating S510.81. all of which were approved, and a cerificate for each separate claim was issued to her certifying the number of the clzim, the amount, etc.. and these certifi cates were prcduced. These original claims show on their face, except those for Magistrates' and Constables' salaries, 7 per cent. discount in cluded in the amounts for which they are approved, the total discount so! allowed being $21.15. To the extent of this discount they are illegal. The legal debt is $48!).66. For several years previous to and including 1904. the Merchants' Building and Loan Association, of Winnsboro. a corporation of this State, and now liquidated, had been buying claims against the county. This corporation was the owner of claims, at the close of'the year 1904, amounting to S17.538.37. One of which claims for S2,203.40,. which, as a matter of fact, represented claims bought for the fiscal year 1903, but a new claim substituted, as in other instances already mentioned; $203.40 thereof being the discotrnt added. Nothing appears on the Supervisor's bo ks to indicate what particular claims this corporation bought, or owned, but its books were produced and its secretary and treasurer examined, and under the system adopted by the association, by which its paper was numbered, we had no difficulty in tracing and finding a large part of the original claims, and they were identified by this officer as well as by the Supervisor. Some are informally approved., but they are entered on the file book as audited and allowed claims,,and we have so treated them. The present Supervisor issued two checks or warrants on the Treasurer,.one for $7,400, the other for $138.37. which were in par+ payment of these claims. leaving a balance of S10,000. He borrowed from Mrs. MY. R. McMaster. as executrix of J. F. McMaster, deceased, $10,000, giving his note, dated March 2, 1905, for $10,700, payable 2d March, 1906, signing it as County Supervisor. He was paid the $10,000, and the same was paid over by him to the Merchants' Build ing and Loan. Association. The original claims'have never been re ceipted or marked paid. The County Supervisor had no power, in the absence of statutory authority, to borrow this money, and the note is null and void. A very small part of the original claims are missing, but it appears from those that were found, that discount was included in them to the extent of $948.73, and as to this portion they are illegal. The balance legally due on their account is $9,051.27. While Mrs. McMaster's note is void, as against the county. she is entitled to the legal amount due on these claims through subrogation to the rights of the Merchants' Building and Loan Association. Besides the note hereinbefore mentioned, the Winnsboro Bank, of Winnsboro, holds jury, witness, and constable tickets, representing the Court expenses for 1904, amounting to $1,834.72, and there is legally due this amount without interest. It has been the practice for.several years, to allow banks purchasing these jury and witness pay certificates t interest on them for the time they remain unpaid, but there is no statu- t tory or other legal authority for it. D. V. Walker, of Winnsboro, bought from the original owners, claims for the fiscal year 1904, which aggregated $842.37, and they included $30.37 bf illegal discount in the amounts for which they are approved. A. note was given by the present Supervisor for these claims adding one t yeai's interest to the $842.37. This note is null and void for v:ant of authority. The legal debt is $812.37. f Mr. J. B. Burley, "County Supervisor," made his promissory note to I Mrs. F. M. Habenicht, for $1,070, dated August 5th, 1905, payable on March 1st, 1906, with interest after piaturity.at eight per cent. per an num. Mrs. Habenicht bought, during the year 1905, claims for that fiscal year which were approved 'for $1,032.89. This note represented. t $1,000 gf these glaims and $70 as interest to accrue from the date of the note: to its maturity, i mnonths anad 26 days. By examining the original claims, it appears that $67.69 in the way of discount had been included in them. By warrant or check, of the County Supervisor, No. 149, dated 26th March, 1906, on the County Treasurer, seventy dollars were paid as interest on this note, and a renewal note made, payable 16th January, 1907. For reasons already stated these notes are void, and the true evidence of the debt is represented by the ori'ginal claims. The legal amount due is $1,032.89, less $70.00, part payment, and less $67.69. - the amount of illegal discount included in the claims, leaving a balancej of $895.20. T. WV. Taylor is the owner of claims bought by him from th.e. original owners, for the fiscal year* 1905,.aggregating $2.108.29, but which are illegal to the extent of $137.63, discount inl~ded, The legal debt is $1,970.66. We find and report that the legal p~ast indebtedness of Fairfield] Counmty is as follows: Fiscal year 1902...............................$ 2 00 .' Fiscal year 1903................................... 3,665 65 Fiscal year 1904................................... 9,418 1,7 It Fiscal year 1905.................................. ;86 86 r WVinnsboro Bank above...............,... 1,16 048 t I The Singing Pimnd loan for the fiscal year 190G3 is $7.400, at the rat' of 5 per: cent. per annum, for the payment of which this year's taxe s are! pledgedl. The schedules marked A. B. C. D. E, F and G. show the antount of approved claims for each fiscal year. for wvhat purposes, and the amount of discount includled, and they also indlicate amount of claims missing or destroyed by the fire. All nioted as missing are on the books. On the Books of the Supervisor. under the Road and Bridge Account, is included the expenses of the chain gang as well as all dlisbursemnents on account of the public roads,.12l under "The Poor IHouse Accounit" are included the disbursements on account of the poor house and aid ex tendled paupers outside of it. WVe have separated the claims to show how much has been expended for each, but where the original claims are missing they, of course. could not be so classified. In justice to the present Supervisor, it should be stated1 that while the expenditure on account of public buildings for 1905. as shown by schedule G. is in excess of other years, this is due largely to' repairing the Court House. and the money collected from the insurance policy was used' for' this putrpose. it should also be noted that in 190-i muies were bought for about S920 with the discount included, and this amotunt is included in the expenses of the chain gang for 1904. These schedules show a steady increase, within the last seven years, in expenditures. more espe cially in aid extended paupers. the latter amounting to S1.93:3.94 in 190.5, and in maintenance of the chain gang. which, from the best infor mnation we could obtain, averages from 12 to 15 convicts. . While it is generally asserted that a very large proportion of those liable for road duty pay the commutation road tax, yet the tax averages only between $600 to S700 pe annum. W\e must conclude that a great many are escaping the tax and avoiding the road duty. East Blackstock Notes. This section is favored with very good crops, especially corn. The cotton is somewhat spotted. The grass is nearly all cleaned out. Messrs Lathan, McDonald and Morrison have some very fine corn and sorghum. My friend, Sam Mc Donald, still has some fine hogs. Miss Bettie McCarley, from the Columbia College for Women, spent several days with hei sister, Mrs. Sam McDonald, and friends here last week before leaving for her home at Boardman, Fla. - Mrs. C. A. Lucas and daughter, Mrs. Bradford, of Dupont, Ga., are visiting her father and other relatives here. Their many friends are happy to see then. Mr. Turner McCarley of Board man, Fla., spent -last week here with his daughter, Mrs Sam Mc Donald, and brother, Mr. William McCarley. Miss Lillie DuPee of Tampa, Fla., was the guest this week of the Misses McDonald. Mr. R. S. Lathan returned last Saturday to Savannah, Ga., after spending some weeks with his parents, Mr. and Mrs. W. J. Lathan. Miss Sara Lathan left Tuesday or her school at Sharon, S. C. Mr. Jno. H. Neil of White - Jak spent a few days here with *riends and old comrades this eek. Mr. E. E. Lathan and family risited their uncle, Mr. W. J. Lathan, this week. July 14, 1906. Uno. Only 82 Years Old. "I am only 82 years old and on't expect even when I get to >e real old to feel that way as 6ng as I can get Electric Bitters," ays Mrs. E. H. Brunson, of Dub in, Ga. Surely there's nothing se keeps the old as young Ana akes the weak as strong as this rand tonic medicine. Dyspep ia, torpid liver, inflamed kidneys )r chronic constipation are un ,nown after taking Electric -Bit ers a reasonable time. Guaran eed by Jno. H. McMaster & Co., iruggists. Price 50c. Not That Kind. There had been a quarrel be ween the two families. The woman of the third-floor [at had emptied a quantity of itchen slops on the second-dloor [at, and the subsequent proceed 2gs were in process of investi ,ation in in the police court. - "I will ask you, madam," said e justice, 'to name the princi ~as of this affair.' "There wasn't any, your honor," napped the complaining witness. It was the most unprnciple ing I ever saw in my life!" hicago Tribune. Does evil still, your whole life fill? Does who betide? Your thoughts abide on suicide? You need alpill! ~ow for prose -and facts-DeWitt's Attle Early Ris'ers are the most pleas it and reliable, pills known to-day. 'hey never gripe. Sold by Jno. H,. cMaster &; Co. Banner Wheat Yield, Messrs. Burnett, Dillard and boipson, owners of Fernwood arms,~ near city, are champion rheat growers, having produced *,218 bushels of wheat on 40 res-more than thirty bushels the acre. This is a splendid ecord, one to be proud of, for his crop of wheat was made in e face of bad season and heavy ains during the early stages of e crops, doing considerable amage.-Spartanburg JIournal. For Over Sixty Years. Mis. wissow's SCOTHrso smwI ns been used for over 60 years by mil ions of mothers for their children vhile teething, with perfect success. t sothes the child, softens the gums, Inys all pain; eures wind colic, and ; the best remedy for Diarrhma. It -ill relieve the poor little sufferer imn. iediatly. Sold by druggists in every )art of the world. T wenty-five cents bottle. Be sure and ask for "Mrs Vinslow's Soothin~g Syrup," and take o other kind. All's Quiet on. the Potomac. t's strangely still in Washing ton, They miss the Cannon's roar; ?he voice of South Car'Iina' son No longer thrills the floor. one is each legislative head That banged the bills about; nd Washington is very dead since Congress has let out! -Cleveland Plain Dealer,. . little love, a little wealth. A little borne for you ~.nd me; t' atll I ask except good beah, Tea. Juio. H. McMaster & Co. If you hear anythicg .creep ing up behind you, you need not look around it's probab y only a ca-idate-News and Conrier.