Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1896-02-17

The letter proved 10 be n dnquisiliou
on the infirmilies Of tue spraying Of
fiut trees with poisonous substances.
DEAF MUTE BILL RkcoNsiDEaED.
Mr.. Lewis moved a reconsideration
Of the vote which passed Senate bill 4,
the deaf mute institute bill. His oh
ject was TO make an smendment. The
action was taken aud the measure
amended and passei.
THIRD READING oF BILLS
House bill %, validating claims
against counties, was taken up for
third reading.
Mr.. Stevens wanted action on the
bill deferred because there were some
Objectionable features In the measure
winch could be efadicated.
MIR. Nye wanted to know u Mr..
Stevens mad any amendments 10 offer
the bill.
Mr.. Stevens explained: He under.
stood that large amounts Of county
warrants have been bought up by the
brokers al n discount, and these brokers
continue TO hold the warrants In order
TO draw per cent interest, thus oblig.
ing tho counties to ray this interest At
tho time Of redemption, Mt the pleasure
OF the holderr, on these warrants. lie
would like TO zee the interest
stopped after certain date.
He moved, however, to Tecommit the
bill TO the Judiciary c9mmittte IN
order that the proper amendments
could be Incorporated.
Mr.. Bolltho Understood that Mr.
LOWS had come amendments 20 cover
the objections Of Mr.. stevens, and Sir.
Lowls being member VI tho Judici.
AIRY committee the amendments could
be mad. upon recommitment.
Mi. Harris wanted the third reading
10 Ro on. IL was not necessary TO pass
the bill N IL was obleciio naOle.
Mr.. Stevens pressed his motion to
recommii the bill.
Mr.. Lewls did not want the bill sent
back 10 the committee, ~ ho knew II to
DO a fact that the committee would not
incorporate the amendment he desired.
lie therefore tfiefed an amendment
cutting on Interest on Outstanding
county warrants from aud after me AZ.
prOval OF the act.
MIR. Howard offered an amendment
stopping all Interest on the warrants
both before anu after the passage Of tho
bill uAder discussion.
Mt. Morrison was opposed 10 DO h
amendments. MtasTs. stevens, Con.
dnu, Nyc, Mnsiield, Bilitho,
Gibson aud uthsrs argued tho
matter pro and con, Mt. Morrison
exhibiting a lot OF vouchers which
were nov overdue aud not yet issued
anu which belonged In small amounts
to u long llst VI working mrn anu
OIhere who were not Ia position to
hold over the claims Ia their possss-
slOu.
Mr.. Lewis changed the wording o.
his amendment 10 ne ~ make the non.
dfawAl u interest by county warrants
date from the time OF the act going In-
~ effect.
Mr.. Lswls's amendment was lost by
q big majority.
Mr.. Lewis offered another slight
atnt ndment, which was carried,
Mr.. Nobeker, Of salt Lake, speaking
10 the passage of the bill, thought that
~ tue taxpayers Of the county had 10.
fused TO bond the county for the put.
pose OF paying these warrants, tue
Legislature would not be doing right
Ia passing a bill which would praotic.
ally have the same Z fleet as the bonding
scheme. Questions came Ike snow.
balls from Messrs. Morrison, Taylor
and Cushing, but Mr.. Neorker soon
disposed Of them, and addressed a lew
pertinent remarks TO Mr.. Nye. Mr..
Nebeker claimed that the agents OF
uome Of the counties Of the Territory OF
Utah had very nagrantly overstopped
their bounds In plunging the
said counties over head and
ears In debt and contrary to the
wishes Of the citizens, who were ,their
masters. He thought II n oase OF this
kind were tried In court as n private
one the employer would not be held
responsible for unlawful contracts by
n dishonest agent; And he thought
that were Mr. Nye on the bench OF tue
court before which such n case were
tried he would NJ rule,
Mi. Nye said he agreed In part with
Mt. Nebeker, Out that gentleman did
not 10 far enough In his hypothesis.
Were he the court 20 pictured by MT.
NebekeT, he would ask the employer II
ne had received thegoods for which the
agent had contracted without author.
~, and II an affirmative answer were
given no should desire this employer TO
honor the contracts OF his -gent. Now.
tins counties have received full value
tor these warrants and the counties
should pay them without discount.
The bill in lite present form should pass
the debts were contracted by the
counties agents land there should be-
no question A. TO tbair payment.
Messrs. 5moot aud rhorns wanted
A A.. al 81.