Mexico weekly ledger., 1898-03-03
AN OPEN LETTER TO s. B. COOK.
Councilman Runkle Vindicates His
Position On the Matter Of Doing
Away With the Fee System
and Placing the Officers
Upon o Salary.

anu AoCAn6 soO SAASSAo
Upon q Salary.
To Mr.. 8. B. CooK-SIR: Apropos
of the question Of abolishing the fee
system In Mexico and placing tkese
city officials affected thereby upon a
stated salary, the only wonderment
to me Is that you have held aloof this
long, seeing that some OF your per-
sonal friends happen to come within
the range of the gun in this matter.
will not consider your unjust ac-
cusation that there Is q tendency upon
that portion OF the City Council which
~retires this spring to reduce the COM
~pensation of the officers in order to
vent petty spite resulting from per-
sonal disappointment to those who
were defeated in the primary, but will
direct your attention to the fact that
the Council knows-and the people as
well-that some of our officials are
receiving remuneration too great for
the services they render.
As a matter of fact, how many of
the people of Mexico knew the amount
the City Attorney is receiving from
his Office, year by year, until a recent
publication was made in the Mexico
LEDGER showing the sum to be 81, 1000.
This Information was simply dumb
founding to the people whose money
goes toward the support of the city
government. It was supposed by the
average person to be all the way from
$3.50 to $3.50 per year. Now, the ques-
ton is: Do the duties of the City
Attorney of Mexico warrant the pay
ment of any such sun of money as
81, 900 per year? The highest figure
named by the lawyers of Mexico is $50
per month-$6O0 per year. This they
consider a fair compensation for the
service rendered. Several attorneys
even place the amount lower. The
attention of Mr.. Cook is also called to
the salaries allowed City Attorneys in
other places the size of Mexico, in no
one of which anything approximating
81, 900 is paid. The services of the
Attorney of Mexico are believed to be
not worth such a sum to the city, and
the Council, the members of which
are sworn to protect the city's inter
ests-and not the individuaPs-have
at last realized that fact which has
been glaring to a portion of this munic-
ipal body for some time.
The City Marshal's office has paid
from ss6 to about $50 per month, and
this is believed by the Council and a
majority of the taxpayers to be a
trifie too high. There r believed to
be other officers of the city who do
not earn the money they receive.
This Champion of the High Fee
System, Col. Cook, says this writer,
who, he claims, is now the chief advo-
cate of a reduction of salaries, knew
as well three years ago what the COM
pensation of the city officials vas as
he does to-day. Colonel, you are COR
rect! And since that day 1 have advo-
Gated, from year to year, the abolition
of the fee system and placing the Of
ficers on a fair salary-but not too big
a salary; a salary commensurate with
the duties they are to perform. For
a verification of this statement l refer
you to any or all the Councilmen with
whom I have served. I have, you
might soy, worked at it almost inces-
sanity, because, a large portion of the
time being a member of the Commit
tee on Accounts and Claims, it was
plain to me that the fee system kept
constantly in the city Jail a gang of
worthless prisoners which cost the
city s1.45 each a day and from whom
practically nothing was realized. This
money had to be taken, month after
month, out of the treasury and paid
into the hands of the feed officers. |
The incentive is apparent. 1t is due
to my efforts that the allowance for
board of prisoners was cut to 45 cents
a day, and at that time and since then
I have advocated that it be made even
lower. Mr.. Sannebeck, Mr.. Houston,
Mr.. Board, Mr.. Kelso, Mr.Adams, Mr..
Steppelman, Mr.. Mundy, and, in fact,
others who have served and are now
serving in the Council will substantiate
my statement that I have always been
opposed to the fee system. If it is
done away with it remains for the
Council to fix the salaries, and not
myself.
MY friend, the Colonel, the Cham
pion of High Salaries, is, as usual, in
consistent, for he says: "The people
have a right to expect reasonable
economy in the compensation of their
public servants" Just SO! But who
is to look after this matter if not the
Council? Rest assured the officials or
the officials elect will not do it.
There certainly is no disposition up
on any part of the Council, so far as I
know, to take snap Judgment upon
your friends, for they are my friends
and our friends as well. Because this
question happens to come up at this
time and vitality concerns two or three
newly nominated officials, and perhaps
one or two others, affords no just
reason to pirate about unfairness
in this matter. This is the v~eriest
bosh and the vaporings of a space
writer who seems to be bidding for
what he deems, in this instance, pub
lie popularity and to serve personal
ends.
Why was not this step taken prior
to the primary? Because it has al
ways been the custom for such mat
tiers to be handled toward the expira-
ton of the term of the outgoing Coun-
Gil. In fact, any change to be made
in the remuneration of the city officials
must be acted upon by the retiring
Council. Any laws along this line
L. A. ------ N---.f -r--l I