Hutchinson gazette., 1898-10-20
Aor1No WITHOUT INSTRUCTION

ACTING WITHOUT INSTRUCTION.
VoTE for Rutledge for county com
missioner. The refundlng Of the
county bonds which the GAZETTE 10
bowling and lying about saved the
county more than ten times what II
cost. There we're no bidders until
after arrangements were practically
made TO refund the bonds and IL IL
had not been for the republican mem
bers the county would not have saved
q cent and no pop or ref0rmer would
have done II for less. The GAZETTE
started this bowling lie some time ago
and 1t goes on the principle that q lie
told and stuck TO Is the only way to
beat the republican party. Every man
OF business sense and honor a thing,
II 10 Impossible for bowling pop to
have, says, that where there ls gain
Of $1,000 for one lost 1t 10 an excellent
business transaction. Rutledge will
he elected by larger majority than
he was before, Nickerson Argosy.
The News should hold closer reign
on It's partner In dividing the county
printing. The News has seemed to
act upon the theory that the only way
to re-elect Rutledge Is to keep quiet
and trust to the failure Of populst
papers to reach the republican voters,
but the ArgoSy has broke away and
Indiscreetly attempted an answer,
Paying no attention to the personal
compliments" contained In the above,
for considering the source, we receive
them as such, we will attempt an an
alysls Of what little argument II con-
talns.
First it says, II saved ten times what
II cost. 1t cost $3 ,30O Ten times 49,.
800 is $S3, 900, AS the deal was lhade,
1t saved the county about one per cent
per annum, At that rate IN twenty
years, for the new bonds are payable
after twenty years, on $75 5000 would
make a saving Of Sl5, 900 in the whole
time or less than five times the amount
paid. But this is not fair way to es-
innate 1t, The old bonds were paya-
BILE and the county had $4,000 on
hand and paid Off $4,000, leaving only
$4,000 to refund. One per cent on
$4,000 for twenty years is Sll 900
which is really all that was saved by
the transaction. or course the ArgOsy
claims credit for the payment of this
$40, 600 on the theory that pop or
ref0rmer" has no business sense or
honor, and would not have done it,
But the Argosy says, "there were
no bidders until after arrangements
we're practically made to refund the
bonds.' Aye there's the rub. The
commissioners had tied themselves
securely to pay Bigger his commission
of one-fourth of one per cent on the
whole transaction before they offered
any chance tor bidders. That Is the
part that stinks. And we will add
that no one knew there was any
chance for bids Til John Myers dug
the matter up. Though the contract
had been made month, no effort had
been made to secure bids.
AS to the question Of what was
saved, no one denies that it was not
the part of good business to refund
these bonds. Anyone knows that
when bonds are payable they should
be paid or refunded at the lowest rate
possible. Any commissioner would
know that. The question is, was 1t
necessary to pay large part of what
is to be saved to some outside party.
We say no, and so far it has never
been denied. The county should have
had the benefit of what was saved and
not L, A, Bigger.