Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1883-12-22
THE INTELLIGENOER AND MR.. Null
LIGAN.

stances, and especially for the allow
ance of a bill of $780,, s4, contracted by
the city engineer, Mr.. John Mulligan,
the largest item of which, S7s 81, was
practically allowed to himself, while
nominally allowed to James Mulligan,
his son, who is a mere boy, the team
he uses being his fathers
In the remarks we made we were
clearly in the line of our duty. A
newspaper that is worth anything to
the community in which it is printed is
not merely a putting machine, to pay
compliments to Tom, Dick and Harry.
There are times when it owes it to the
people to condemn public officers. 1t
is not pleasant to have to do this, and
the persons criticized, we know, do
not like it, but SO long as we conduct a
newspaper we propose to exercise our
rights as a journalist in that direction.
If o%ficeholders do not desire to be
criticised let them live up to their duty
and the law. Mr.. Mulligan permits
his ire to run away with his judgment
when in a card in heR egister he resorts
to Billingsgate. We shall not permit
ourselves to descend to the level of his
composition. We volunteered to print
anything he might desire to say in JUS
tiication of his course, but do not feel
called upon to republish such a scurril-
Gus article as he has written. We still
stand ready to give him as much space
in these columns as he may wish, pro-
vided, simply, that he couches what he
has to say in decent English.
The question of ~verscity as to Mr..
Mulligan's authority to do the work on
Water street, for which the allowance
was made by the council at its last
meeting, is between him and the i'm
provement committee.
The only question between the writ
err and Mr.. Mulligan is raised by this
statement:-s'I visited the editor of the
Intelligencer in regard to this matter
and asked him if he was the author OF
that article and he said he was not. He
said it was Mr.. Homer. Then I went
to see Mr.. Homer and he Indignantly
denied it in the presence of Mr.. Charles
Kidwell." There are tive serious
errors here. First, when Mr.. Multi
gan had the interview with the writer
we sought him, not he us. We UNDER
stood that he had been to see us twice
in our absence, and had made some
comments on the difficulty of finding
us, so we went out on the street to
look for him. We found him on the
corner of Franklin and Laurel streets,
and conversed with him in q walk
thence to the corner of Main and Pine.
1t is not true that we said Mr.. Homer
was the author of the article in the pa
per. This may simply be a confusion
of terms with Mr.. Mulligan. In an
swer to his questions we gave Mr..
Homer as authority for the state
ment that the committee on improve
ments had not ordered the work on
Water street, and Mr.. Taubman as our
authority for the statement of the al
lowances made. Mr.. Homer does not
edit this paper. Its editor does, and
never shirks responsibility for what
appears in its columns; he seeks no
quarrel with anybody, but he is al
ways easy to find; and he does not pro-
pose to be bulldozed or browbeaten
out of a free expression of his opinions.
The day has passed in this part of the
world when newspapers can be intimi-
dated in that way.
Now, briefly as possible, as to the
facts. The assertion that the Intelli-
gencer's criticism was malicious is un-
warranted. 1t was as severe in its
structures against the council as it was
in those upon Mr.. Mulligan, and sever
al of the councilmen are our personal
friends. Without the vote of the coun-
Gil he could never have received the
money.
1t is well understood that no job of
city work coming to more than 500
can lawfully be done except by an or
der Of the city council. Some months
ago the council passed a resolution that
the city engineer should not thereafter
do any small jobs of work upon the
streets except by order of the commit
tee on improvements and repairs.
AT the last meeting of the council the
improvement committee and the COM
mittee ON claims refused to audit Mr..
Mulligan's bill. The council neverthe-
less allowed it, without investigation.
1t was this that called forth comment
and caused us to look into the matter.
The bill for the ~culverts was authorized
by the council. With this we found no
fault. The bill for the grading was not
authorized to be contracted, by the
council, as the following will show.
RESOLUTION ADOPTED NOV. IL, 1898.
Mr.. Hamlet moved that the city put in Gull
verts on Water street under the directions Of the
city Engineer and Improvement committee.
provided the Ferry company and Bus company
would repair said street. Carried.
I, the undersigned, city register of the city
of Lexington. State of Missouri, certify that the
above is a correct transcript of a resolution
adopted by the city council. ut its meeting on
the night of November II, 1855, and that no or.
der has siuce been made BY the council to re-
pair or grade said Water street.
Given under my hand, this December 20, 1888,
al the City Hall In the city of Lexington. Mo.
JOHN TAUBMAN,
City Register.
Upon the authority OF Mr.. Homer we
stated that the work was not authorized
by tho improvement committee. The
following will indicate whether or not
MI. Homer was right
LEXINGTON. No., DECEMBER 20, 1883.
We. the undersigned, members of the commit
tee of improvements and repairs of the city
council, state, that We did not, individually or
collectively. order the city engineer to do the
grading on Water street. for which an allow
ance was made at the last meetin g OF the city
council.
MICHAEL HOWELL,
CHAS. F. HOMER,
j. X. DAVIS.
-