Baxter Springs news. [volume] (Baxter Springs, Kan.) 1882-1919, 1892-09-24

aud asked them for bids. Owing 10
the very urgent necessity for bridges,
and having the bridge company's es-
Inmates 10 the county commissioners
before them. u contract was made with
the Missouri Valley Bridge Co, of
Leaveuworth, Kan, TO furnish these
Two bridges and have them built be-
fore the great reunion was held, Tor
800 for the two bridges. The salts
factory price made for these bridges,
the quality OF work done by the COM
pany and their ability to put them in
at once, caused the council to contract
for these bridges without waiting for
other bids. Right here is where the
mayor and council made a mistake.
The clerk had not been authorized by
the council to send out any particular
kind OF Il notice for bids aud they did
not know that the bridge companies
had been given any fixed time in
which 10 make bids. for they had not
inquired of the clerk in regard 10 this
matter. After the contracts had been
made and signed and the bridges
were about completed in the factory,
couple of young men who had been
at Columbus bidding on some county
work, came down to Baxter and de-
mandcd the right to bid on the bridges.
When notified that the contract had
been let they claimed they were in time.
and at once cast about for some one
to help them get up fuss. They first
tried Mr.. Downing, but he was too
good a citizen and too much of gen
lleman to take spite work case and
that. TO, against the best interests OF
the ciiy in which he lived. They then
tried Mr.. Smith, the obliging lawyer,
whose services are always ready for
any kind of case, especially one
against the officers of his own town.
Smith carried the case up before the
commissioners and in The presence of
men from his own town argued from
the statutes of this state that the COM
missioners of this county had no
right TO appropriate 5000 to the city of
Baxter Springs to build bridges, and
by declaring that the bridges that are
now built in our town would not carry
their own weight, and by just snch
representations as these caused the
county commissioners, Jackson and
Armstrong, 10 vote to reconsider their
former action, to appropriate 5000 to
this city for bridges. Commissioner
McGregor opposed this going back on
fair contract, but he could not influ-
ence the other two.
The commissioners have put their
foot knee deep into trouble out OF
kindness and in order TO accommodate
the citizens of this town. They may
have stepped little outside the re-
qurements of the law, and no man
objected but paid attorney who rep
resented corporations from Missouri,
and that man Il citizen and tax payer
of the town who was TO receive the
benefit of the appropriation.
AS it now looks, the people of Bax-
ter Springs will be obliged to pay for
their own bridges or begin suit
against the commissioners TO compel
them to pay TO the city Of Baxter
springs INC HlOHHy Nolcu ~, anu WI
the strength Of which vote our mayor
and council contracted these bridges.
One thing is certain, and that is that
the city of Baxter Springs is not re-
sponsible for the official acts of the
county commissioners, and the law
that is as old as government itself
makes the city officers responsible for
their own acts only. Under the stat
uies of this state county boards are
allowed to appropriate two thousand
dollars without advertising in cases
of replacing old and dangerous bridg-
es. like the one on Sheridan, street or
washed out or wrecked bridges urg-
emily needed, like the one on Military
street by the spring.
The foregoing is plain statement
of the facts. The citizens can draw
their own conclusions and put the
blame where it belongs, but IL does
seem that this town is doomed 10 dis
appointment. Her people are wronged
by her own citizens, but old Baxter
Springs is all right and will come out
ali right in this bridge business. But
it may take time. BAxTERITE.