Show THE OTHER SIDE martians Marx ians charges against auditor chayton refuted in s of the legislature mr marahall read a paper that reflected enfa orally upon the public chaar cliton which we bubli n lat nights beus came out with tilt between a reporter of eliat p iper and the auditor w lu ch w e consider it is our duty to publish it is as follows auditor chayton was seen today to day iu ref rence to a paper read in the legislative council yesterday by mr marshall that discrepancies to tho amount of over had been dig cohered in the accounts of the territorial auditor of public accounts A comparison of the reports of alie auditor and treasurer showed that the charges were edse and biad ci dently been made with nn licious intent for a full esplan aaion of the matter however a neica asked mr chayton CI ayton what lia ve you to say about the statement presented yesterday by mr marshall can ou explain its cause auditor ggayton replied in reference to the report presented in the council esterday et erday it starts out erroneously and continues tonti so all through the report bah there is a marked discrepancy beaw een the amounts stated by the auditor a received from the counties and the amounts so stated by the treasurer alie auditors does not show any amount received from counties or any other source but merely gives the total valuation of property assessed in the various counties of the territory for the years 1886 7 and the revenue arising thereon at the rate of three fifths of one per cent and as experience has taught that the whole amount of the tax ia never collected the auditor suggests fl reduction of 8 per cent to cover amounts that may be remitted by county courts A ho leave this authority to remit in certain cases at any time and as a matter of fact do so i emit together with losses through failure to collect etc this per cent has proven not excessive in the past and in fact lias hardly covered alie amount of losses etc the treasurer s report shows the whole amount received during the years 1886 7 from every egurce and without reference to years it may go back ten years or more hence his report has no reference nor bearing upon the report of alie auditor asa matter of fact the revenue for 1887 is not delinquent until jan 1888 and a large portion of the amount is still uncollected as shown in the report of the auditor of december 31 1887 reporter what about the reference to funds and the assertion that to apportionments were made for 1885 Is not this another blunder auditor it certainly is the auditor is required to report to alie territorial superintendent of schools the amount of school tax assessed m the several counties of the territory upon which statement the superintendent makes his allotment without reference to whether the tax is collected or not the school fund of 1878 waa allotted in 1879 and that of 1879 in 1830 and so on up to at the latter end of 1886 the territorial rit orial school superintendent requested alie auditor to submit a statement of the amount of school tax arising from three mills on the dollar for school purposes for the said year and made his allotment accordingly fabich allotment was paid by the issuance of auditors var rants as was the custom this made to allotments in the year one being for 1885 the other for the current year the allotment for 1887 was made in 1887 and paid out as usual without regard to whether the tax was collected or not thus the school fund at the end of december 31 was largely over drawn these are matters over which the auditor lias no control as he is required to report to the superintendent of schools the amount of school tax arising from 3 milla on the dollar and alie superintendent allots without regard to its collection As to there being two credit for 1885 there is no such thing the report made in gave the credits to the school fund for 1883 and 1884 as the allotments were one year beliinda beli ind this year they come to date and bo reported |