The Case of the County's Vanishing Funds

All has not yet been said on the subject of those attorneys' fees. The commissioners meet Monday, and they should have all the data possible before acting. Just suppose, for the sake of the argument from the attorneys' point of view, that they are—and the treasurer, clerk and auditor are not—entitled to put into their pockets fees coming into the office, how do they explain this little condition of affairs? The report of Ex-Attorney Pearson shows $12,732.55 total collected in cash, from which he deducted $720 for fees in cases settled by the delinquent tax payers paying cash. He also deducted $408 of hard cash for his fees on land sold to the county, and for which the county got never a cent of cash. Attorney Schofield's report shows a total of $7,100.66 collected in cash, and he, as did Pearson, deducted $652.00 for fees in cases that were settled by the taxpayers coming up with hard coin; and he deducted from the remaining cash, as his fees, $4,453.00, turning over to the county $1,995.66, notwithstanding the fact that never a cent had been paid into the county on those cases for which he retains in cash the $4,453.00 as fees. Now, the question is this, and it is an insistent one that the commissioners and the people will not ignore: Granting, for the argument's sake, that the county attorney is entitled to a fee in each delinquent tax case, how can he retain the cash obtained in the settlement of one case for his fee in a case in which no cash at all has ever been paid?