The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-12-30
ONE r1ORE BILL.
Attorney Rhodes Salary in the Nor
ris Bribery Case.

ris Bribery Case.
The present board of county COM
missioners still does business in a pc
culiar manner. At a meeting held yes
terday morning they added another
queer transaction to their record dur
ing the two years service they have
now rendered the county.
1t Will be remembered that some
weeks ago County Attorney White
more appointed l.. r. Rhodes special
deputy county attorney. Mr.. White
more stated very plainly to the board
that Mr.. Rhodes was to be paid no
salary. ChristoDherson and Roberts
were very careful and asked the county
attorney particularly if the appoint
ment would mean a payment of salary
to Mr.. Rhodes. Upon being assured in
the negative, they voted for the ap-
pointment. Imagine the surprise, to
the spectators at least, when at yes
terday's meeting the following claim
was presented by Mr.. Rhodes:
To services rendered county attorney
in trial case State VS.. Morris November
2lst to December End, 1896. and in full
for services in same case to be retired
commencing on this date December
2Sth), $3.50
And this was supplemented by the
following eDistle from the county at
torney:
Gentlemen beg to apprise you that
the pressure of work that was put upon
the county attorneys office during the
months of November and December
growing out of grand jury investiga-
lions in regard to the failure of the
Bank of Salt Lake and other criminal
charges, and the large amount of civil
litigation over tax matters and the
careful investigation of important tax
questions, was such as to necessitate
the employment of additional assist
ance in the Office. and to aid in the
trial of the case of the State VS.. ]. r.
Morris AT the former hearings pri-
vate counsel appeared by employment.
but being unable at this time to avail
myself of his assistance, / deemed it
wise to obtain the services of Hon.
l.. r. Rhodes in this capacity, and 1
beg to advise you that / consider the
claim for $3.50 presented by him for
such services a verv reasonable com
pensation for the services rendered by
him. Respectfully yours.
c. o. WHITTEMORE,
County Attorney.
Roberts was the first man to speak,
and called the attention of the other
members to the fact that when Mr..
Rhodes was appointed it was with the
express understanding that there was
to be no compensation.
Christopherson expressed his surprise
at the claim and sided in with Roberts
as to his understanding there was to
be no salary attached TO the appoint
rcent.
Assistant County Attorney Waite let
up on smoking his cigarette sufficiently
to tell the board he thought the claim
very modest one, and that it did not
begin to compensate Mr.. Rhodes for
services rendered.
Roberts, don't dispute that. but
how will the people view it? Can we
make them believe that the employ
ment of Mr. Rhodes was a necessity,
while the county attorney is away in
California attending to other business
than that of his office2
Geddes-We must do our duty re-
gardless of what the people think or
say. Mr. Rhodes was employed by
the board to assist the county attorney
in the Morris case and as we all know,
that case has dragged along for some
time. 1t has compelled Mr.. Rhodes to
neglect his own affairs, some of which
only recently he had to put off indei-
nitelv.
At this point Al Reese looked up the
minutes, which substantiated the con-
tentions of Commissioners Roberts and
Christopherson. But the board were evil
IDENTIFY glad of another opportunity to
submit to being buncoed by the county
attorney, for when Geddes moved to
allow the claim they all voted for it,