JUSTICES HELDAll But Two Arc Declared Careless In Handling Of Fines, Other FundsSERIOUS ACCUSATION FACES' LIVINGSTON MANShortages In Accounts Shown, Report Filed In Clerk’s Office DeclaresCriticizing all but two Marccd County justices of the peace lor eareles3 bookkeeping and making an. even more serious accusation against former Justice J. P. Whcr-ity of Livingston, and branding as unnecessarily large the county'* expenditures for caro o£ iniilgente during the last fiscal year, the report of Cunningham Wcit, county auditors, was on file in the ilctccd County clerk's office today.Two Commended Tn more than two-score pages of typewritten manuscript, the report goes Into detail regarding courtly expenditures. In its remarks concerning justice courts. Judges JL A. Storey of Merced Kails and Harold Bone of Merced only win com-' mend at ton.The portion of the report concerning former Justice Wherlty has been referred to the grand jury and the auditors retained to make a special investigation for the in-quiaitorial body. That investigation is almost completed.Tho original report, which is dated September 30, says in reference to Wherlty, who resigned subsequently, that this judge's books showed a shortage of f ISO, and gocu on. aa follows:Itecords LaxAs the above noted discrepancies vVould Indicate, the record* of this official were found to have been kept in a very careless and lax manner. In fact, front (he large number of cases In which fines were collected from sundry ■ offenders as indicated on the docket and some cases where fine was collected and not entered on the docket and tho court's failure to properly record the amount of these fine* in W3 feo book wuutd seem to indicate that this official ha3s boon ' appropriating county funds for tho furtherance of personal interests.In substatiation of this statement, _wc would respectfully call attention of the honorable board to the undemolcd specific cases which we already have discussed verbally with you at a regular meeting held in August,Cases Arc Cifcd In thn case of The People vs.Brodericks the defendant, was fmed 1200 and so shown on the : lt;court docket. Later the docket was - altered and the amount of tho fine changed to read $150 and this latter amount reported in tho fee pomt and is the amount actually turned in to the county treasurer.Correspoadence with this defendant discloses the fact that he lind actually paid the court S200 and stated that he had receipts for this amount - .of C. A. IVaiton. there was no record of or.y fine having been entered on the court’s docket or in the fee book. Correspondence with this individual de-VCI?5,2 ,he fact that hlt; had paid a 510 fir.c and that he hoJef3 a can. celled check with the indorsement of the justice thereon.',v'c also direct your attention to tho fact that as of June 30. 1023 taking into consideration the dis^ erepancies as detailed fn the above list, tho collections of fines during the month of July, J928, the amount of cash ball money in the custody . . « «o’frt and the collection ofInstallments on fines, which were considered as open by us but which of necessity must be accounted for, this official should have had in his possession county funds, in tho amount of $305. where verification disclosed that there was approximately only $123 available for immediate transfer to count” funds or an existing shortage of Jt*lt; aa of August 1. 1023.•should nr, ickmoveiv“fn view of all the fart* ns stated above, the. present iMcusiiWnt of this office Is. In otir opinion, Incompetent and should undoubtedly be removed from ofiice.”After taking up the other justices ' individually, the report discusses i other county department* and says:I During the. fiscal year rndinc June 7.0, 1325, $!77/ilSlt;3 was ex-, pended from the indigent fund ■ through the countv hospital and ; welfare board- This was 123,003 in(See JUSTICES, Page 2. Col. T»