Arizona republican. [volume] (Phoenix, Ariz.) 1890-1930, 1895-01-09
The EX-LOAN COMMISSION.
The Territory's Injunction Suit
Comes Up.
Arguments for and Against the Pay
ment of the Much Heard-of
Warrants.

The injunction proceeding OF the ter
ritory against Territorial Treasurer P.
J. Cole to restrain him from the pay
ment of various warrants issued in IA
vor OF William Christy, ex-territorial
treasurer; Thomas Hughes, xterri-
torial auditor; N. A. Morford, ex-ter-
ritorial secretary, and Ex-Governor
Murphy was heard before Judge Baker
yesterday morning.
The aggregate amount of the warrants
is several thousands of dollars, and the
expenditures, which they were issued
to cover, grew out of the operations Of
the late loan commission. Treasurer
Coles connection with the case may be
said to be ex-oficio.
The suit was filed six weeks ago but
at that time 10 temporary injunction
was asked for, for the reason that there
was then and would not be until the
date set for the hearing any money in
the funds against which the warrants
were drawn.
The territory was represented by At
torney General Heney and the various
defendants by kibbey & Israel, G. F.
Ainsworth and L. H. Chalmers. Only
the legal phases of the matter were
presented upon which the complainant
prays for temporary injunction until
the case can come up in order upon
fact
Mr.. Heney took the general view
that the services OF the members OF the
loan commission were EN- ployed in the
Il of hOrizn1 NV nop-
gress for which they were to receive no
additional pay, though as federal Oil
GERS they might receive extra compen-
sation for duties imposed upon them
by territorial enactment.
The fact that the territorial legisla-
ture had passed upon the act of con-
gress creating the loan commission for
the performance of certain duties under
the funding bill did not. he held alter
the federal or general character OF
those duties.
Upon his theory part of the war
rants were invalid upon their face. In
the case of Others in payment of neces-
sary incidental expenses he contended
that they were drawn for sums largely
in excess of reasonable pay for the
services performed and consequently
did not represent necessary and Incl
dental expenditures" For instance in
the case of ex-Secretary Morford to
whom had been issued at two different
times warrants for 81 $50 for fixing the
seal upon |, $3.50 bonds, he contended
that tn ough 81 was allowed by terri
torial statute for fixing the seal the
territorial statute was not applicable
for the duty was not territorial duty
but federal performance. As such
it might have been necessary but the
charges for performing it should have
been so reasonable as to be considered
items of necessary and incidental ex-
peDditure.
Objection was also made in the case
of several OF the warrants, that they
had not been ordered drawn by the
commission, which alone could author
iza the payment of expenses incurred
in carrying out the provisions of the
funding act.
The attorneys for the defendants held
the ground that their actions had been
properly authorized by the territorial
legislature in cases unprovided for by
the congressional act, and that in such
cases the legislature acted with consti-
tutional authority. The matter was
taken under advisement.
| DR.. Prices Cream Rakinp Powder