The herald., 1893-11-10


best explain, the new demand presented
to Auditor Teale yesterday embraces
only the items relative to the trip to
San Francisco and return. This foots
mp $42.95. The item of transportation
to San Bernardino and return, of $3.65,
is omitted from the new bill.
The first demand was not sworn to,
but the present one has an affidavit and
is duly sworn to by Mr.. Trask.
The question which was presented to
those who knew about the two bills was,
why this difference? What generous
impulse had operated upon him to re-
lieve the city of the expense of railroad
fare to San Bernardino and return?
1t was answered by q discreet refer
ence to Mr.. Trask's pull with the rail-
road corporations. In other words the
question is, did the honorable member
-. the school board travel to and from
San Bernardino,on a pass?
II be did 30 he did not pay out the
1896 which he, however, charged up to
the city in his first demand and ex.
pected to receive as perquisite.
> If he did pay the fare for that portion
Of his journey, as he stated he did in his
first demand, why has he dropped that
charge from the demand now presented
and sworn to.
There is something very singular in
the juggling of Mr.. Trask with the two
demands. 1t would not amount to
much with private individual but in
view of the provisions of the constitu-
tion relative to public officials the bad
break made by him in leaving out the
iteu, and with no explanation, becomes
legitimate subject of inquiry.
1t L. y
ing upon the subject is not only plain
and simple, but emphatic. 1t says:
''Article IL, section 10. No railroad or
free passes or passes or tickets at dis
of honor or trust or profit in this state
and the acceptance of any such pass or
ticket by q member of the legislature or
any public officer, other than railroad
commissioner, shall work forfeiture OF
his Office"
1t is true that the supreme court has
decided in the case of a San Bernardino
county supervisor, that where an officer
is counsel for such corporation he can
carry pass and use it. 1t is also true
that. the legislature has not especially
provided for carrying out this provision
Of the constitution.
Mr.. Trask is said to be, however, cor
porative counsel for the Southern Pacific
but not for the Santa Fe systems.
The question has also, been asked jby
persons who have investigated the
matter, whether or not Mr.. Trask did
not ride to San Francisco and back on a
pass upon this very same trip. Of
course il he did not do so, it is easy
enough for him to show that he did not
do 80.
2 Since this matter came up yesterday
there have been rumoTs around the city
hall that take in others besides Dummer
Kiah Trask.
1t is thought to be very singular that
the city librarian, Miss Teasa Ke,so, re-
fused and still refuses to itemize her de-
mand for the expenses of her trip to
Chicago and back. No one ia ungallant
enough to say that Miss Kelso rode east
and back on pass and is now trying to
collect the amount of the railroad fare
from the city, but there are rumors of
all sorts of trips being taken by various
city officials at various times.
II Mr.. Trask had not left off that
item of railroad fare to San Bernardino
and back from his present demand, no
ono would ever have been so curious as
every body is now to know just why he
did it.