Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1892-05-17

1 ''h'hf AAhtN ltl uutNiNUDt ana tho
costs OF the sales. OF this approximation
the collector retained in his hands Tho
amount OF the void special school taxes
uniil he paid them into tho Disfic, Court
| along with the rest OF tho said special
school taxes which were In his hands "A
collector, under the courts orders above
referred to- aud II thus became subject
20 Tho charges made upon tho rnnd by
the court.
was never informed by any membar
OF tho County Cmir. nor by tho collector,
nor by any other person. that any such
appropriation had been made, or that any
idnds OF salt Lake county were Included
IN the special school tax fund, which was
tho subject OF the litigation In question,
ana had no knowledge or suspicion of
II nnlil few days ago whom your COM
mi''eo WAS appointed. was then
AsroSisnEp 10 LEARN or IT,
and am now equally a.tnnishod that tho
committee, ~ appears from their report,
should expect the county attorney OF any
one oiso To conjecture that the county
might have an Interest In a piece Of Inf.
/ gatlon by reason OF the County Court.
violation OF tho plain and direc, pro-
Visions Of statute. Certain tits that
had no knowledge whatever tina, salt
lake county had any romoicsi interest
connected with H.
Tho Appropriation was clearly irregular
aud Illegal. The statute saws that tho
| olork shall giyetho collector "creditn In
his accounts, but no such thing was done
Instead, the County Court drew money
| out OF the county treasury aud handed IL
over to tho collector, aud with Il the col
lector marked all the taxes paid. by this
means The county IL made 10 pay tho Tor
Iitory aud - school di.irlcis their taxes
In advance. In cash, with tho oounty's
money, whilo for ~ own taxes II must
walt until the lands are redeemed from
the tax sales OF become tho property Of
tho county by allure OF redemption
within two years. No such scheme a.
this II authorized by the revenue laws Of
/ this rorritory.
| Court may mako such q remarkable do
parturo ~ this from the simple aud un-
oqulyocal directions OF statue ~ not
negligence. A county attorney Is not to
| DO charged with tho duty Of watching
every appropriation County Court may
make 10 SEQ whoihor II II in violation Of
the law. lie Ia to DO called upon for adj
vice and Il Is the duty Of the County
Court to call upon him for advice whom
thoy arc In doubt. Whatover loss, there
fore, the county has claimed TO have sui.
forod, with respect to tho fund In quos-
ton, II duo to the act OF tho County
Court In making tho appropriation to tho
/ collector In tho first place, aud la falling
TO call tho attention OF the county atlOr-
noy to its interests In the matter Ia the
second place. The chairman OF your
committee had Knowledge " tho appro-
| priation when II was made; tho attention
Of the attorney was mover In any manner
| called To ", or TO any interest OF tho
county In the fund. This was nogli-
gonco on the part OF tho chairman; and II
/ the county fools that II should be rsifu-
| bursod for the amount Of these charges
| against It's funds, II should look TO those
mcmbors Of tho County Court OF 1891,
including tho chairman Of said com
mitteo, who on May ith u that year by
this appropriation irrcgularly and with
out warrant Of law placed tho countys
money where II became subject 70 those
charges, and who, knowing That tho APP
| preparation had boon made, took no stops
| to inform the county attorney OF IL or to
| direct his attention IN any manner TO tho
! fact that moneys OF tho county were ln-
cludcd In the TAX fund question. II this
was not negligence on his part, then thore
was no negligence on the part Of the coun-
| " attorney.
To make this action OF tho conrt all tho
more remarkable, this appropriation was
made not only long aitor tho validity Of
those special school taxes had been at
tackled In four different suits which were
at that time pending, but several weeks
after the supreme Court had announced
ita decision holding these taxes void.
We have presented hero, then, tho
spectacle OF County Court making n
voluntary, Illegal appropriation, Of which
tho county attorney had no knowledge,
Tor tho payment Of taxes which the couri
N....N IL. a 4
OF iis members who participated In tho
appropriation now complaining because
the attorney had not omni-cienco 10 undo
the work aud got all tho money backl
The substance Of tho statements con-
talned In this communication was stated
by mo 10 the chairman OF your commit
tee. The report falls 10 motto this. II falls
also to note the fact that Immediately upon
my learning Of tho fact OF tho cOunty's
interest In this iund by reason OF tho
appropriation In question, and before
your committee had taken amy action or
| expressed any views upon tho subject, l
rendered 10 the chairman OF said com
mi,iee for payment into the county trea-
snry the full amount OF the attorney feo
charged against the couuty's fund which
l personally had received, thus inadyef-
tently ns one Of counsel for the intorvon-
or-. This tho chairman declined until
tho committee could consider the matter,
but was not given an opportunity 10 ro-
now tho ofier 10 the committee. | have
since paid tho amount to tho county
treasurer, and hold his receipt for tho
same.
have thus made good to tho county
every cent which I nnwittingly and In
ignorance Of the unguossable facts above
rot forth, and through no fault ofmy own.
received of tho money In question. II