The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-08-16
THE CITY JAIL.
Dissatisfied Taxpayer WI
Writes


Upon the Subject.
To the Editor of The Herald.
1 trust you can find room in your
influential and unbiased journal for
the following observations on the lat
est Job in the city council. The
writer would rather, much rather,
not say any thing regarding any of the
city officials inasmuch as in calling at
tention to their derelction he is him
self condemned. Condemned in this,
that when these gentlemen were run
ming for the city council the writer be-
lieved that they all would work for
the city's interest only, and so believ-
ing he took Of his means and of his
time and effort to elect them. The
error is acknowledged and the blunder
regretted.
According to the statements in Mr..
Davis card, published by you on the
Sth instant, it would seem that the
members of the city council have lost
every thing but their cunning. The
press has repeatedly called attention to
their "secret work. and to it's mem
bers' interests in supply contracts. In
stead o. needing these just reminders
of public duty they seem to have
grown reckless and desperate. They
seem to have ''taken the bit in their
teeth" and are rushing full tilt into
the taxpayers pocket.
That a council committee could pos
sibly enter into 'fcahoots" with a jail
company, even if the company has
been here over a month to sec them,
would be incredible except for the
proof. That private devices" devices
that may be superseded any day,
should be incorporated in the Jail
specifications is incomprehensible ex-
cept on the theory that competition
was not wanted and that the Pauly
Jail company should have the job
Color is lent to- this theory by the
fact that all Of the first bids were
thrown out when it was found that
Pauly's was the highest and from the
further fact that a bid of about $1,000
less than any was, the last time, not
reported at all. If, as Mr.. Davis states,
HIS bid is more than $4,000 less than
Pauly's who gets the difference? The
committee must be we'll aware that
as good jails as are in the world have
no "Pauly devices" The writer has
no interest in this jail question other
than as a bona f1de citizen of this
city and a taxpayer, one who regards
the city's welfare and takes pride in
the character Of it's inhabitants.
It may, with good reason, be urged
that a new Jail is not indispensable for
some time to come. While it would be
a convenience it is not such neces-
sity as will warrant the entire deple-
ton of the city treasury. 1t is true
that juries have condemned the pres
ent JAIL so has the inmates; but the
taxpayers with great unanimity have
refrained from joining in the proceed
ing. The first concern of the COM
munity. regarding criminals, is its own
protection.
Criminals are not apprehended and
incarcerated for their own convenience
and comfort. The present Jail has
done service in times much more pros
porous than these and can be made to
do so now.
People, who themselves, this coming
winter, will sleep on hard beds, in
cherries rooms, have scant food, and
who are honest and willing to work
do not take kindly to the notion of
furnishing comforts to the vicious. The
city is about bankrupt. 1t cannot
liquidate all it's pending claims today.
And although the powers that be have
raised our taxes there still will be a
deficit next year of $1,000, and that
without buying any "Pauly devices"
1t is to be hoped that some one in the
city council who has some notion of his
position and some conception of honor
and public trust and who cares for the
burdens of the taxpayers, will de-
nounce this scheme as it deserves.
TAXPAYER.