The Bozeman weekly chronicle. (Bozeman, Mont.) 1883-1889, 1884-01-09
nat warrant.
10 ne Editor ofae Boseman Chronicle:

SIE-In . late issue Of the CHRONICLE
you stated that virtually, You were moi
acquainted with the merits Of the dis.
agreement between the Mayor and the
Board Of Alderman-but that you would
inform yourself and judge between u.s.
and decide without being Influenced by
popular feeling, upon the subject.
That'aesertion seemed tantamount to
two admissions So > ''''f'
lst. That'y 3u were not informed on
the subject; and,
End. That, you, nevertheless, had pre-
judged the case. l predicted what your
verdict would be the moment l read the
article and your issue of the 3lst, ult.,
proves that l had not done injustice. Il
now speak upon the superstition that tina
article is yours-though suspect it is
not)
In that article you profess to give q
history ofthe case, including the special
meeting of Friday. But do you? l say
no. Were you, or was any representative
of the CHRONICLE present? Certainly
not.
Was anyone except the city authorities
present. Most certainly not.
From whom, then, did you secure your
data? From me? No-you have never
spoken to me, por to you, upon the
subject.
From whom, then? It II not difficult
to suEmise,
How, then, when you present but one
side. can you pretend to state all the
acts7
Why do you not record the insulting
treatment to which l was subjected by
Mr.. Koch? Why do you not record the
hct that denied the assertion of Cooper
and Koch that ! bad "sent my veto COM
munication to the papers before it was
communicated to the Council?"
Why do You not record the fact that !
asserted the fling of il with the City
Clerk the moment It Was written, and
that my control over It then ceased, Is it
had become public document?
Why DO you not call attention to the
fact IT, y Cooper aud Koch claimed, "the
Mayor had injured the credit of the city"
by refusing to sign an illegal warrant,
that the Council had by issuing it, Lot
only injured the city credit" but had
offered . premium to falling contractors?
Why do yoa lay 20 much stress upon
the astonishing assertion of Koch that at
the time the warrant was ordered I
offered no objection, but merely asked
IF the contract had been complied with"
while, on the contrary, called attention
to various items in the olntractor's fail
ure?
Why did you not record the open
statement of Anderson that it is public
belief that one of the Board Is interested
in that contract?
Why did you not reeord the fact that
alderman Koch has admitted to me
that he believes that statement to be
founded in fact7
Why did you not record the fact that I
cared nothing for the so worth of work
You say Koch referred to, but that 1 pro-
tested against the illegal release of the
contractor from an otherwise untitled
contract?
Why did you not record the fact that
Cooper and Koch announced the discov-
cry 10y them, as patentees) of the great
truth that the Mayor is the mere clerk"
of the Board, bound to sign any draft
upon the public funds Board my order?
Why did you not record the fact that,
under such . Boss Tweed theory, the
Treasury may be robbed At any time,
should q thieving Board ever be elected?
Why did you not record the fact the
City Attorney has from the beginning
disapproved the operations under this
contract of both the Board and the con-
tractor?
But enough-I know I am right in this.
l shall never sign that warrant unless
forced by legal process, or unless the con-
tractor gives bonds to complete the work
under his agreement.
Such q question must be met some
time, and it may as we'll come under my
Is under that ofmy successor.
make and have no charges to bring
against the Board. claim 1t has made
nor am in such . minority as
your article would lead one to suppose.
With me stand, Messrs. Anderson and
of the Board; Mr.. Davis of the
Board and Street Committee; the Street
Commissioner and the City Clerk and
the gentleman Of the
Board who seem 20 alarmed over the
publicity given to this matter
are referred to the fact, that the surest
way to bring anything to . proper under
Il 10 put It in type. It hurts no
one except the party in the wrong.
Nv. BoGERT.
December 3lst, 1883.