The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1897-06-07
An Interesting Issue.

An interesting question in law is to
be argued before the judges of the COM
mon pleas court in Luzerne county on
next Wednesday morning. 1t comes
up in mandamus proceedings brought
by the commissioners of that county.
Messrs. Hay, Quincy and Jones, against
the controller Mr.. Lloyd and, in
words shorn of legal technicality, the
real point to be determined is whether
the controller, in counties which come
under the act creating that office (and
thank heaven, Lackawanna doesn'tD,
is a bigger man than the judges and
the commissioners put together. The
nub of the controversy is in the diff
ferent constructions placed by the
parties at issue upon section 10 of
the condrollership act which reads
as follows:
That from and after the passage of this
act all contracts made by the commits
sioners of said county involving an ex-
penditure exceeding 800 shall be in writ
ing and shall Immediately after their eX-
ecution be filed with the controller; but
no contract shall be made nor the pay
ment thereof certified by the controller
for over 500 unless when made with the
lowest and best bidder after due notice
to be published by the controller when
directed by the commissioners, if he APP
prove the purpose of the proposals invit-
ed, all bids to be received by the control
Ter under seal and to be in his presence
opened by the commissioners and the
contracts awarded, of which award the
controller shall keep a record and he
shall certify no warrants Tor contracts
not made agrecably thereto.
The LuZerne commissioners recently
wanted to make a contract for 10000
tax collectors statements, bound into
1862 books, and they directed the control
Ter to advertise for bids, naming three
newspapers in which they desired to
insert the advertisements, He refused,
claiming the authority to contract for
and name the newspapers himself
hence the suit. This, however, is only
one instance of many. Some time ago,
If we remember correctly, Controller
Lloyd raised a similar contention over
matter of advertising ordered by the
court itself, and friction between him
and the commissioners has been con-
tinual since he assumed his present
office. He doubtless considers that he
is simply enforcing the law as he un-
derstands it; but it is obviously desir-
able to have the matter determined au-
thoritatively, so that the public may
know whether or not it will find it nee
essary to demand the entire acts re-
peal.
If the section quoted above shall be
construed to mean that in counties
with 100000 or more population all prior
legislation governing county contracts
such, for instance, as that relating
to sheriff's sales, ballot printing and
other matters heretofore specifically
provided fOr-became imperative upon
the enactment of the controllership act.
then Mr. Lloyd's contention will be sus-
tained, and he will thenceforward be
in shape to do Luzerne county's busi-
ness for it strictly in accordance with
his own ideas. Such a result might
not prove an undisguised public mis-
fortune in this particular officials case
for we are told that he is as honest as
he is fearless; but generally speaking,
1T needs little argument to show the
unwisdom of putting into one mans
power over contracts. There have been
cases where such power discreetly
welded for three years, would retire it's
beneficiary to the enjoyment of an i'm
posing fortune; and it is quite sure
that the opening of such a prize to
competition at the party primaries and
conventions would have anything but
salutary influence upon political
ethics. What sums would an unscrup-
ulous candidate not be willing to spend
in order to gain the say for three years
over county contracts!
We do not expect that Controller
Lloyd's view of the controllership law
will be upheld; but if it should be, that
law would certainly have to go. 1t
would then become intolerable.