The river press., 1886-02-10
The RIVER Press.
Published every Wednesday morning
bg the River Press Psbtssh-
ing C0nlp0ny
FORDIsM.

This is term that might well be applied
to stupidity and something worse in coun-
ty management. 1t would have particular
application where a county aGicial is con-
tinualIy overriding the law and where he
becomes the abettor and attorney, as IL
were. of private individuals to the detrl-
ment and loss of the county.
There has never been iii this county SO
outrageous breach of trust and violation
of one of the plainest laws Of the land as
the cancellation by Commissioner Ford OF
the cattle assessment in discussion. LII lG
was one of his usual blunders and he was
willing after the error had been pointed
out to correct the same, there would De
some palliabion, some excuse for his con-
duet. But when, on the contrary, he not
ONLY clings to his error, but seeks by the
most miserable species of pettifogglng to
maintain taae wrong, to the detElment OF
the county, and to shirk the responsibility
of his acts, taen it becomes an otfense that
we hardly know how to characterize.
Yesterday we showed how Ford clutch
ed at the Samples case as a warrant for
his action in cancelling the assessment OF
this herd of cattle and also made it clear
that the cases are not iii the least parallel.
But let us look at this after-thought plea
for justification ia another light. The as
SCISSOR listed this herd Of cattle and at an
adjourned meeting of the board of equala-
zation Ford cancelled it, the owners haV-
ing shown that the cattle had been taxed
In Oregon. Not word, remember, was
said about the "money having already
paid taxes for the current year." The
owners Of the cattle have too much good
sense to make sfbreakD of that kind.
Their plea was simply on the broad ground
that the cattle had been taxed once for
1885 and in justice should not pay taxes
again. But now comes Ford who says ssWe,
the majority, released them from taxation
for the very reason that the assessor gives
(and i'm which you so heartily concur) for
not assessing the Samples herd, that is be-
cause the money had already paid taxes
in Choteau county, having to my personal
knowledge reinyested in these cattle the
money obtained by the large shipment of
beef from their own herds and others
Now the records will show that neither
one of the owners Of this herd are assessed
in their own names for a single hoof CT cat
tie in this county, and how then is Mr..
Ford, as a commissioner, to know that
this statement he makes is true, even If it
has any bearing on the case? Is he to
turn his board of commissioners into a
court and take evidence as to where the
money comes from that goes into certain
property; is he to 90 behind the records,
ssbehind the returns to find out these
things? That appears to be Mr.. Ford's
idea, but Of course the law cOnfers nc
such powers on a board of commissioners
These are questions to be determined in
the district court. if any where.
The more this matter is probed the more
unfavorable is the light in which the chair.
man Of the board is placed. BY his spe.
cial pettifogging he stands convicted Of
something worse than an error Of judg
ment. for after his mistake was pointed
out-yea, even after he had drank in the
elixir Of legal lore on the subject--he re-
fused to right the wrong done The county