Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-07-31

rary and illegal order of the Trustees, anc
with that money we have taken up about
| $4,000 of the debt, and can take W
about $4,000 more, making, in all, about
! $4,000 But $4,000 is a very slight
exaggeration for the Mayor to make.
WHAT THE OLD TRUSTEES DID.
Now let us see what the Board of Trus
tees dnring the five years from 1876 to lSS(
did These were the five years imme
diately preceding the declaration of wal
AGAINST our Board. During these five year,
the Trustees did not pay quite so much
interest on the funded debt as the present
Trustees have paid within the same period
But the old Board paid large sum on the
Holly Water Works debt. They paid OF
the Fowle bond debt larger installment:
than the present Trustees have paid. They
also paid larger installments on the Fire
Department debts So, think, they paid
on the city debt, taking all classes together
considerable more than the present Trus.
tees have paid. As to what they did fol
the Fund Commissioners The old Board
levied 81 OF in five levies for us to buy in the
debt The new Board has not levied one cent
With the money levied for us from 1876 to
1880, and the small interest fund we had
added to that, we took up in city bonds
S217 500; future coupons attached to
bonds, S45l, 1874; detached coupons, Sl40,-
IA; total, SS09,S6S Take from this the
amount we will get this season, say $780,
600, and We have difference of 1923, S6S
in favor of the old Board. Had Mayor
Brown and his Board levied for us the
same amount the old Board did, we might
have taken up more than million of dol
lars of the debt. When we took up that
100000 of the debt we had to depend
mostly on this tax of 81 o. We had at
that time a very small interest. But in
1881 the interest fund was large and an
nually increasing, growing like rolling
SNOWFALL when we were tied up The
bonds and coupons were on an average as
low or lower while litigation was going on
as they had ever been. There were more
than 100000 of coupons that could have
been purchased at from 20 to % cents on
the dollar; and half the amount pur-
chased compounded every year. Had the
Mayor and his co-Trustees followed the
law the debt to-day would not have been
over half million dollars in bonds, with
interest all paid to date.
sQUANDERING THE CITY MONEY.
The Mayor thinks the only money
squandered was fee of $50 paid for
bringing two suits for the Fund Commits
sioners. Here the Mayor takes nice
distinction. He thinks this as Trustee AS
Commissioner, he seems to have thought
differently. The first suit we had brought
was in December, 1882. 1t was against
! he 70 l..
Commissioners $4,000 on coupons. We
thought we were entitled to the money.
and if we did not sue we might lose it. At
4 meeting of the Board Mr. Lord made
the motion to employ W. II. Beatty to
bring this suit. John Q. Brown and my
self both voted for the motion. / will say
that this was Mr.. Lords own motion to
employ w. ii. Beatty. | never made any
suggestion as to what attorney should be
employed, and should have voted for any
competent attorney Mr.. Lord or Mr.
Brown had named.
Subsequently, in October, 1884, Mr.. Par
sons and myself, by resolution, requested
W. II. Beatty to attend to bringing another
suit against the Treasurer to compel him
to pay to us money which Mayor Brown
and his co-Trustees ordered him not to pay
to u.s. Now, was it likely the Trustees
lawyers, paid and instructed by them,
would have aided us to get out of the
hands of Mr.. Porter money which they
were telling him all the time not to pay
US?
Is was only by means of this suit we got
out of the hands of the Treasurer about
$l27, 900 this spring, with which we have
bought and added to our Understanding
fund $4,000, and soon expect to add
$4,000 more. This SlS0,000 is bringing
interest for the city all the time. Had
we not employed counsel in this last case,
the Treasurer would have had that money
yet. Probably at least year longer before
we got dollar of 1.-THE city in the
meantime losing the use of it. Mr..
Brown thinks to pay $50 for these two
suits is squandering the peoples money.
But for him to spend thousands of dollars
in litigation-which was directed more
against the Fund Commissioners than the
creditors of the city litigation which
half a million to a million of dollars be-
yond what it need to have been involved;
litigation which has raised the price of
bonds and coupons far beyond what they
would have been if the city had kept out
of useless lawsuits; litigation which has
enriched Meyer and Davis, whom the
Mayor pretended to be zealously opposing,
to the extent of not less than one-fourth
of a million dollars-is economical use of
the peoples money.
The Mayor criticises my explanation
about the manner of using the money col
lected for the sinking and interest fund.
The Mayor was nearly eight years in
our Board If he does not yet understand
that explanation of the manner of using
these funds, don't think he could under
stand any further explanation | could
give. | shall not attempt to get down to
the level of his mind.
TINE REQUIRED TO PAY OUR DEBT.
In regard to my statement about the
ability of the Fund Commissioners to pay
the city debt in thirteen years, and the
counter statement of the Mayor that it
would take nearly sixteen, | will say that
it is impossible to go into a calculation in
newspaper article as to the time it
would take to pay this debt submitted
statement and calculation in detail Of
the probable time it would take on the
Mayors basis of purchase, at 20 cents, to
the cashiers of the three principal banks
of the city My calculation shows that
on that basis we could pay the debt
short of fourteen years. That is, within
thirteen years and a fraction. Those gen
tlemen examined that calculation and in
dorsed it as correct in their above pub
LEGATION.
But the Mayors assumption of 20 cents
on the par value of bonds and coupons is
not a fair basis. This debt consists of
three items: Past due coupons, $3.50, 000are
worth 20 or II cents on an average; bonds,
81, 062, 600, are worth in the market at pres
ent 60 cents on the dollar; future coupons,
S55S,000, are worth less than 50
cents If we buy the bonds We get the
future coupons for nothing. If we buy
the coupons as they are cut from the bonds
for the next ten or twelve years, at
say 20 cents on the dollar, these bonds,
after the coupons are all removed, will be
worth, as Mayor Brown has told us hun
times, s. cents on the dollar instead of 20
cents.
So the Mayors theory about it taking
sixteen years to pay the debt is absolute
nonsense. We have been offered bonds
falling due in 1908, with all future coupons
attached, at 60 cents on the dollar One
of these bonds for 81 900 would have