Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1892-10-12

due TO the people that no be prosecuted.
II mon who commit such Oilonscs arc al
lowed to escape tho operation OF the lnw
1t will encourage others to pursue a sim
liar course.
law aud official honesty an example he
made of this case by tho proper stems
being taken for the prosecution OF
Hughoa.
As to tho watcrmaster's department |
md the manner OF conducting tho aamp, |
there " lack OF business shown In tho |
loose manner of conducting tho same. No |
records arc kept for water rights uc- ,
quirc1 by tho city and the different |
rights citizens have against the oltyi also, |
tho loose manner IN which the diilorcut |
watermnstcfa' pnyrolls arc presented. |
The watermastcr does not know how
many mon are hired Ia tho different pro.
cincis, and II unable 10 toll until tho pay.
roll ~ presented at the end of ovcry wcolS
or two weeks, as the case may be, and
evidently does not know whether they
are employees Of the city or not, rs tho
evidence In tho Hughes case provcs.
II was near midnight last night when
the above reports were read by the
recorder in the council meeting. Tho
spectators who had relapsed into
somnRmDulistlc state were more than
aroused from their drowsiness by the
discussion that followed.
Karrick moved the adoption Of the
majority report.
Rich Immediately afterwards took
the floor ana moved the adoption q
the minority report.
Hardy spoke earnestly In favor Of The
adoption OF his report. He declared
that the loose aud questionable way OF
doing business that characterized Mr..
Harvey's Office was disgrace and II
crime aud should DO stopped. Harvey,
the alleged watormastcr, excused him
self on the ground that he didn't
know Of the Irregularities which eX'
listed In his department, especially M
to the actions OF this man Hughos.
That was the trouble. The city had
watermaster hat didn't know anything
when he didn't want TO anu when
| IL was not To his advantage. He was
simply a slnccuro In office, and very
expensive one nj that, aud the sooner
the city discovered that fact the better
| II would be OF.
karrick, In hls quiet and unassum.
Ing way, took up the cudgel OF defense
for Mr.. Harvey and declared that II
wna absolutely true that the water.
master knew nothing OF the conduct OF
his deputies. "Why," he said, "Mr.
Harvey was more surprised than any
other man when IL was learned that
tricks and crooked work were being
INDUCED in." Tine censure that had
been given Mfr. Harvey was premature
and uncniled for. When Mr.. Harvey
had learned OF tho true nature Of
things he discharged Hughes.
Beirdsley stated that he had signed
the mojority report, but that he also
favored the minority report. Tho
statements contained therein were cor.
rect. He believed that Mr.. Harvey
knew nothing Of the dishonest work OF
Hughes, but there was no denying the
inUt TINT Mr.. Harvey conducted thC
affairs OF his office in very careless
manner.
Mr.. Evans concurred with what Mr..
Beardsley had said.
Rich asked Mr.. Evaus, chairman
Of the committee on irrigation II II
were not fact that aflldavits had been
drawn up IN Mr.. Harvoy's and CITY
Attorney Hoge's handwriting cy
ouorating Hughes; his b, II wore not
true that MIR. Harvey kept no books oi
records in his office aud that tho only
memoranda he kept OF the many min
ute affairs OF his office was what he
carried under his hat
Mr.. Evans admitted that this de
plorablc state Of affairs was correct.
Rich also wanted to know II 1t wer,
not true that MIR. Harvey did not know
who were employed In his Office auI
the only way that he could tell was by
referring u the city pay rolls.
a painful and ominous ilssh o
silence intimattd that this ais,
was correct. AZ 20 tho insulting
letter recently sent into the Council by
Matchmaker Harvey, Rich declared
he knew whereof he spoke when hi
: stated Mr.. Harvey had said that The
councilmen were getting entirely toe
fresh aud that he and other heads o
departments would soon take oc
casion TO call them down. Man.
things In Tint department wor'
, carried on In strange man
/, ner. The deputy watcrmnste
OF the Third precinct had not been h
the Territory lang enough to regietel
. and vote without violating the law ant
I running chances OF prosecution. Twt
. months ago the Council had passed |
l resolution authorizing the watermaste
TO clean out CITY Creek from sixth Il
Eighth West streets. For four week.
the resolution was In the hands OF tn
watermaster but he failed To act
1t was then turned over 10 thu
, street department, but MIR. Har
yey showed his stubbornness by
. refusing to turn the water out OF TIT
, creek 70 that the work could 10 done
That kind OF business must bo stopped
Rich concluded his romarks by saying
| that he could call the matter up ut the
next meeting OF the Council.
Folland stated that Hughes was al
/ all around rogue, entirely without thu
. sense al honesty or manhood. He was
, not In favor ofprosecution without JUS
and sufficient cause, but here wasa MAJ
that had proven himself a fraud aud I
forger aud should DO dealt with nc
coIdlugly.
Lawson said there was every EVIL
, dence that the wionRs OF Hughes ha,
Z been wlnled al by oil cials whore duty
II was to ferret out crime ami prevent
: Its commission.
More discussion followed and tn
/ majority report was adopted.
THE ATFIDAvIrs
= referred to do not seem TO be calculate,
by those who have them in possession
0 10 be made public. They were mad
by emploSes aud ex-employes OF tn
Z city before the committee on irrigation
y and show that a general system q
{, forgery has been carried on.