The Ravalli Republican. [volume] (Stevensville, Mont.) 1894-1899, 1897-05-12

printing, and the same impression
prevailed in the Times and News
offices. Is there a citizen in the
county who does not believe that if
the Times or the News had known
that the contract had been let at
figures which were, in fact, but 333
per cent. discount, and consequently
much higher than their bids, they
would not have brought the commits
sioncrs to account? Would not the
taxpayers have made a kick? Is
there Il man in the county now who
believes that the board OF commits
sioncrs. consisting Of J. NJ. johnson,
l'. S. Chat1in and A. n: MittoWcr,
would have entered into an "undcr-
standingi with one Of these bidders,
unknown to the others, by which
they were to give said bidder 100 per
cent. advantage over the other bid
dcrs ia matter in which the people
Of Rayalli county would have to pay
the bill? Is there a man in the
county who would not believe Sig
Chal1in and Abe MittoWcr when they
90 upon the witness stand, and upon
oath. say they did not give one
bidder that much the best of the
others? That is what these men,
two of as good mcnSas there are in
Isaavalli county today, went upon the
stand and sWorc to. The court, in
its reasons for the verdict, entirely
ignores their testimony, in fact,
ignores any testimony whatever,
given by the county, and bases, Us
far as the opinion reads, the decision
and findings on the testimony for the
defense, to the effect that there was
such a dishUnorablc deal entered into
by the commissioners and Mr.. Fuulds.
The court does not admit or mention
That there was any testimony to the
contrary. 1t says, in effect that
when the defense testified that such
Il deal was made the case was settled
right there, for it says that the bid
put in by the defendant was based
upon this disllonorablc understands
ing,
i SO far as can be
gathered from the proof. both parties
acted honestly.
So far rs can be gathered from the
proof introduced by the defendant.
But what Of the proof introduced by
the county? Was no crcdencc to be
given to the testimony Of the COM
miasiuncrs? Or to that Of the county
clerk and his deputy? $50 far as
can be gathered from the proof both
parties acted honestly" in entering
intoa private understanding whereby
one bidder was to be given an ad-
vantage and the county funds were
to be made to suffer:
The testimony being admitted, VIC
have THIS anomalous condition Of
things: Two parties to a contract,
both Of whom are clearly mistaken as
to the terms Of it, because section
1908 Of the Compiled Statutes Of
Montana forms a part Of the printing
contract. These parties entered in
to this contract under this mistake:
they carried out the contract in good
faith under this mistake.
Still considering but one kind Of
Testimony, that offered for the de-
fcnsc. nos the least reference to
contradictory evidence. In fact, in
the whole judgment and explanation,
there is not Il single expression to
show that the court ever considered
or took any stock in, or any account
Of, even q portion Of the testimony
for the plaintiff. Indeed, SO far lis
the county was concerned. its case
would have been Just as strong,
and it would have stood just as good
Il show to win, if it had rested on the
complaint alone without introducing
testimony. Testimony for the plain
tiff apparently did not count.
= :: = Z < Under the
proof in this cause the defendant
would have made Il different bid if
the understanding Of the statute had
been different.
If he had put in Il different bid,
based upon Il correct Interpretation
Of the statutes, and on the figures he
ultimately got for the work done. he
wouldn't have stood the ghost Of 4
show to get the contract, for his bid
would have been the highest Of all.
And the other papers would have
made d different bid ir their under
standing Of how the statutes were to
be construed had been different. Or
| if they had had an understanding"
beforehand, such as Mr.. Faulds tcsti-
| fled he had. Tie Western News, in
That case, could have put in bid Of
s. per cent. discount and still have
made the county pay more for the
work than it would have done under
its bona tldc bid Of 5S per cent. dis