The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-05-16
OGDEN HAS A
LEXOW AFFAIR
Continued from Page u

rant No. 14.701, $2,7497S. Total, 81, lao
Dec 2. 1895. a communication from
the Diebol1 Safe and Lock company
was read. They stated that arrange
ments had been made with F. w Wad,
for the erection of the Jail work, anC
requested that the court use out of tn,
money coming to the company suf
cient to pay freight and other ex
penses incident to the erection and
placing of the work.
wADE'S LITTLE PICNIC.
All members were present at this
meeting and knew that Commissioner
Wade was to direct the placing of the
jail and accept the work as commits
sioner and superintendent of the court
house. l viii now quote from a letter
from the Diebold Safe and Lock COM
pany. on file in the county clerks office,
as follows:
when these disbursements are
made. including the amount to be paid
to Mr.. E. w. Wade for his services in
erecting these cells, a statement will
no doubt be furnished us by your
board, and the balance Of contract
price for these cells forwarded to us
direct"
From this letter it would appear that
the Diebold Safe and Lock company
expected the work TO be done by the
county court, and a statement made
of the money expended on this account,
but no statement of expenditures was
made Of the money drawn by Com
missioner Wade on these warrants,
nor is there any record of the amount
received b. him for his services in
erecting the Jail.
II any saving was made. the benefit
was received by either the Diebold Safe
and Lock company or Commissioner
Wade. The amount received by the
Diebold Safe and Lock company was
$2,749 IS. amount expended by Com
missioner Wade was 1880. %.
It seems to me to be of very aues-
tionable propriety for a commissioner
to enter into a contract on behalf of the
taxpayers; become the trusted agent
and representative of the party with
whom the contract was made; per-
form the work under the contract;
then as county commissioner repre-
fenting the taxpayers, accept the work
(dOne by himself as contractor) and
authorize payment for the same. It is
also. l believe, a violation of the law.
which provides that mo member of
the court must be interested, directly
or indirectly, in any contract made by
the court or other person in behalf Of
the county, for the erection of public
buildings or for other purposes"
question of whether the debt limit was
exceeded or not Mr.. Bateman gives
figures showing that more money was
expended than the revenue of the
county amounted to. Assuming that
the expenditures on the court house.
26.379.0S less s93T.7S on hand. are an
obligation of the year 1895, then the
revenue for 1896 was only exceeded by
81. 393.61. Taking the opposite view
oil he
house during 1896 were an obligation
of that year, the revenue was exceeded
by the sum of $29, 1874. 81, but according
to the recent court decision the debt
limits for 1896 consisted of the actual
revenue for the year and five-twelfths
of the revenue of 1894. and 1895. The
revenue of 1894 and 1895 was in excess
of SS4, 900. five twelfths of this amount
would be $500. therefore the amount
expended in 1896 was safely within the
debt limit. although largely in excess
of the revenue.
MR.. WADE'S SNAP
81 find that Commissioner Wade re-
ceived warrants as follows:
No. 1857, dated Jan. 81, 1896,
No. 147O4, dated Feb. "a, 1896.
amount Observation-Disclosures. 101 40
No. 1859, dated March so, 1896,
amount Observation-Disclosures. 140 so
Total ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 1887 20
The vouchers state that these war
rants were drawn for services rendered
as superintendent of court house build
ing at the rate of 81 per day, (and
charges for horse and buggy
from December 81, 1895 to March 80,
1896. On March 4, 1896. Commissioner
Wade drew warrant for $3.50 for salary
as county commissioner for quarter
ending March 81, 1886. and on June 90,
1896, he received a warrant for S127. 40
for expenses as county commissioner
for six months ending June 90, 1896.
The statute fixes the compensation of
the county commissioner at $50 per
(after January T. 1880, and
actual expenses itemized and sworn
to, but it appears that Commissioner
Wade drew double salary and double
expenses from the county for the first
three months of 1896, and also received
from the Diebold Safe
& Lock company. for experimenting
the erection of the jail at the same
time.
1t appears that the amount of s397.20,
warrants drawn in January, February
and March, 1896, less an amount due 10
January 4, was illegally paid and that
4 demand should be made for same to
be turned into the country treasury.
CARING FOR THE POOR.
March q, 1895, the members of the
tenn county court met, but no quorum
being present, no business was trans
acted. Commissioner Wade charges
30 so for attendance and mileage. On
%, 1895. the same thing oc-
cured and he charges $3.50 for attend
ance and mileage / do not know
whether these charges are legal, but
all your attention to them. January
}. 1895, a warrant was issued to Com
missioner Wade for $50 and January
IS d warrant for $500, account con
.ingent poor fund" No report was
ever made Of this money and while
he county clerk included the amount
n his financial statement under the
head of appropriation to poor COM
nittee for contingent poor fund I do
lot consider that it was a proper
.harge as a county expenditure, with
tut being itemized and approved. On
Tune %, 1896, Commissioner Wade re-
,eived warrants aggregating $500 Ito
Lpply on contingent poor fund and
,ther contingent expenses"
AS all of the commissioners drew
warrants for their expenses for the
Intire year. do not know what other
contingent expenses could be, but no
eport of the expenditure of this
mount $4,000 is on file 1t is included
n the clerks report under the head
f contingent poor and expense
und'' It would seem that a properly
tented claim should be presented for /
.pproval. or the amount turned into
he treasury.
The report shows an entire lack of /
ysten in the matter of tax sales and ]
Awarded