The new North-west. [volume] (Deer Lodge, Mont.) 1869-1897, 1884-04-18
The Court House Matter.

There has not been much agitation OF the
Court House matter here recently; in fact We
had not even heard 1t referred to for fort
night until within the past few days. Inc
Commissioners at their last session extended
the time for receiving bids, but took no FUR
Their action. They were informally notinsd
that fund had been raised and attorneys AZ
Butte employed to enjoin them from build
ing, but how this injunction was to be sued
out and on what point Of law II was TO De
based, has not been made known to any one
that we are aware Of II there is legal OBJ
stacle to their building they will certainly not
proceed; they have not even said they would
build 1t IL the proposals were favorable, the
financial arrangements satisfactory, and all
the people clamoring for 1t. IL is presumed,
however, from their previous action, that
they are disposed, IL the proposals and
finances are favorable, and there is no legal
obstacle, to build But pending the contest
of that question and the extension OF time,
there has been nothing done, and very little
said about it here. This silence appears to
have alarmed some of those who are antaRo-
nistic, and they have latterly been firing
anonymous scrseds into the Butte and Helena
papers on the subject, while they easily and
gracefully stay concealed in the brush. That
is not pretty. 1t is not fair fight. Where
personalities are INDUCED in 1t Is bushwhack-
ing What a correspondent has to say he
should put his name to, IL 1t is worth signing
or printing.
None OF these correspondents, however,
offer any very strong arguments; in fact, DO
not offer any. They are ELUSIVE, diffusive
and exceedingly airy. Doubtless the Com
missioners would be glad to have any good
citizen Of the county present any reasonable
objections he may have to the project; but
hostility without q reason, should have no
weight. 1t is q very important matter they
are considering, involving the outlay OF
large sum of money, end they cannot be too
well assured that it is necessary and that the
county can bear the debt without strain, and
liquidate it without taxes becoming burden
some. These questions are not trivial and
should not be decided by them, nor should
others offer them advice without most care
full deliberation. We believe the Commits
sioners have the authority to make the ex-
penditure. But we IS fully believe 1t Is An
authority that should not be vested in a
Board of Commissioners. The law specifies
that school trustees must submit the question
of issuing bonds for the erection Of school
buildings to a vote of the electors, and that
the amount shall not exceed two per cent. of
the taxable property in tho District. This
law is lame and weak, but II shows purpose
to limit the power of trustees. But no such
law applies to county buildings. Article 2,
Fifth Division of the Revised Statutes, con-
tains these provisions:
SEC 33s. Each county organized for judi
cial purposes shall, at its own expense, pro-
vide o suitable Court House and sufficient
jail, and other necessary county buildings,
and keep them in repair.
SEC. 34S The Board Of County Commits
sioners Of each county shall have power, at
any meeting.
Third. To build and keep In repair county
buildings, etc.
This we consider an entirely too unlimited
power to vest In Boards of County Commits
sioners, and whether this particular project
shall be consummated or not, q law should
be passed by the next Legislative Assembly
requiring all propositions for the erection of
county buildings to be submitted to vote OF
the property taxpayers Of the county, and
limiting even the per centage of public debt
that may be thus incurred in any one year or
any number Of years. This we believe to be
the safe and correct principle. But tue law
does not so stand. So far as this project Ia
concerned we discussed it fully in the issue
Of March IA, and have not had any occasion
to change our views. We believe the
county can we'll afford to build the Court
House proposed at the price named. We do
not believe Deer Lodge county can rational
" continue to take chances on its Records
Had we been Commissioner we would
have favored an investigation of the build.
ing by the grand jury, and, II they reported
adversely, submission OF the question to the
electors, although we do not believe non.
taxpayers should vote on the question Of ap-
preparations for public buildings. But the
Commissioners deemed the authority vested
in them, as it probably does, and have pur.
sued q different course. We believe them
thoroughly conscientious and endeavoring
to do for the public welfare in the premises,
and that no property owner will ever have
cause to regret 1t or feel burdensome taxa
ton therefrom IL they build 1t. But there
are many good citizens of the county strong
", very many without carefully determined
and we'll based convictions, we believe, op.
posed to 1t. And, a. the Commissioners are
all Democrats; as they have recklessly let
the past fly by without awaiting themselves
of our counsel in the premises; as we are not
opposed to the building on the terms they
can now secure; and as they will make some
enemies, for a time at least, IL they do build,
we do not propose to advise them in the mat.
ter either one way or the other. II they do
build Court House they should build not
less substantial and commodious structure
than that contemplated; IL they do not build
they should at least provide ample and safe
vaults for the records, and we do not see that
this can be done in the old building and
leave Office room.