The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-12-08

revelation relative to the Warm Springs
lease and the mayors veto upon the
subject, were well repaid for the time
sacrificed. The lessees unburdened
their tale of woe; proposition from
Proprietor Schenck of the sanitarium
to lease the springs at high rental
was received, and the mayors veto was
sustained. Contrary to expectation, the
threat of the minority to retaliate upon
Mayor Glendinning by prodding him on
the charge of having grossly miSuSed
the contingent fund and refusing to
account for disbursements from it, all
because of his action in disappearing
Barnes & Byrnes' new lease, failed. In
stead, a programme of explaining votes
against sustaining the veto, during
which some harsh words against his
honor was adhered to- The star fea-
lures of the entertaining programme
were a little bit disiointed, but as
GROWING act in the comedy, Council
man Callister's effusion on Mulvey's
celebrated monday dream brought
down the house. and will pass into his
tory as unique Interpretation of the
cOuncilmans vision"
The mayors veto, as published in The
Herald recently, was read, and in the
same connection the recorder read a
communication from Barnes & Byrnes
calling attention to some alleged grave
errors in the mayors veto message rel
ative to the proposed amended lease.
THE LEssEES INNING.
Barnes & Byrnes' communication
stated that the mayor was altogether
in error regarding the receipts OF the
Warm Springs property, and criticized
the city for entering into compact
with money lender (referring to Ba-
cons sanitarium prOjec0 to destroy
their business. This compact and the
business depression crippled them so
severely that they were compelled to
appeal to the city for better terms. The
communication closed with a plea to
not let the veto prevail, or, in that
ever, that an appraiser be appointed,
as provided in the lease, and take the
property off their hands. Referred to
the committee on public grounds
A RIVAL WILL PAY MORE.
Next came a communication from
jeremiah Schenck, who is one of the
chief persons in interest in the sani-
tarium. to the effect that since he IN
6erstOod Barnes & Byrnes, the leSsees,
desired to be released or have a reduc-
ton in the rent, he would make a prop
osition as follows: He would take the
Warm Springs property as it now
stands for the nine years remaining
under the Barnes & Byrnes' lease, pay
ing 5000 monthly in advance. That the
council may not be annoyed with petit
tions for reduction of rent, clause
may be put in the contract of lease
that no request for a reduction of rem
tai shall be asked or granted during
the term specified.
The Schenck communication was re-
ferred TO the committee on public
grounds, and the city attorney asso-
ciated.
THE VETO CONSIDERED.
Finally consideration of the eXecu-
tiVe's veto was commenced.
Wiscomb wanted a weeks postpone
ment, because he thought some of his
colleagues would be unable to weigh
the claims of Barnes & Byrnes and
consider the veto on the merits while
having in mind the Schenck PROPOSE
ton, which, he believed, had been pre-
sented to subserve some unworthy pur-
pose.
LIE PrOhon concurred in Wiscomb's
views, yet he thought the proposition
from Mr.. Schenck worthy of serious
consideration.
Lloyd wanted one bridge crossed at
q time and favored immediate action
on the veto.
Callister expressed his surprise that
another weeks postponement was de-
sired. When the majority at the pre-
Tious session conceded postDonement
till now, it was with the implied prom
Use that the minority would be prepared
with figures to refute the mayors cal
citations. Now he wanted them to
demonstrate what they wanted a weeks
time to undertake.
The molion 20 postpone was lost, only
LIE Prohon, NViscomb and Newell vot-
ing in the affirmative.
THE VETO SUSTAINED.
The roll call vote on sustaining the
mayors disapproval of the new lease
to Barnes & Byrnes resulted as fol-
lows:
Noes-Le Prohon, Mulvey, and Wis
comb.
Ayes-AIIen, Buckle, Callster, Dale,
Hayward, Lloyd, Norris Romney and
Stewart.
Excused from voting o'Meara and
Newell.
Absent-Diehl.
As the vote was taken, the opponents
| to the veto seized the opportunity to
explain their positions.
In G very incoherent manner LIE Pro-
hon undertook to make some remarks.
The substance of his mixture of words
was that Barnes & Byrnes' contentious
were correct, and that the mayor was
maliciously incorrect.
Mulvey declared that the presenta-
ton of the Schenck proposition con-
WINGED him that there was something
rotten" in the veto. The mayor. he
said, had solicited his vote for the
lease. He had investigated the claims
of the lessees for reduced rental. and
was convinced there was merit in them.
and, moreoV er, the committees recon-
mendation helped form his conviction.
He charged that the mayors action
was cOWardly, although he could not
believe that his honor inspired the veto.
and, according TO his belief, the mayor
"let out the job of writing Yetoes.''
MORE EXPLANATIONS.
O'NIeara announced his intention OF
voting to not entertain the veto. for
the reason that he believed the mayor
had no jurisdiction in the premises. He
held that the executive had power only
to veto ordinances and resolutions call
ing for the expenditure of money. The
council, he believed, had sole author
ity in the matter of renting city prop
erty.
O'Meara's contention was ruled out
of order, and the only way he could get
his ideas in the record was by excus-
ing himself from voting, for the rea-
sons stated.
Newell refused to vote for the reasons
given by O'Meara.
Wiscombs reason was explained to
be that ne favored no action that would
lead to the Sanitarium company hav-
ing monopoly on the sulphur bathing
rT,iVi1popS