Arizona republican., 1899-02-05
WHO IS THE THIEF?

lulu-San Francisco grievance full
 swing in the editorial page of that staid
 family crgan A man with a griev-
 ance, unless he be extraordinarily sa-
 gacious, is as apt to injure friend as foe in the process of getting even- If ha be naturally inaccurate tic
 friend who gives him carte blanche Eneeds to watch out This was well il- lustrated yesterday in the Gazette's ar
 ticle attacking The Republican. The
 man. with grievance charged
 The Republican with being "the
 prime thief Of the public
 treasury and specifically designated
 the publfca ton of the proceedings of
 the board of control as the chief act
 of this papers alleged tnfamy.
 For tie information of the author of
 the Gazette article we wish to supply 9
 few facts concerning the publication of the proceedings of the board of control in which one c. P. Leitch, ad
 vertised editor and proprietor of the
 Arizona Gazette, was financially aswell
 as officially interested. The following
 appears in the minutes of a meeting of
 the board Of control held January 20, 1896, at which were present L. c.
 Hughes, c. P. Leitch and M. H. Me Cord, members of the beard: Re
 solved, That the proceedings of the
 beard of control be published in the
 Arizona Gazette from the first meet
 ins of the board up to and including
 the last meeting held i'll 1895.'' This
 resolution was passed unanimously.
 The burden of the Cazette's song yesterday morning was that The Re
 publican had published proceedings
 of the board which were enacted by another administration. In other words, we had published "old" proceed ings. The board of control was orga- nizdd On March 27, 1895, from which date there were proceedings. The above resolution took care to specify that everything was to bc published from the first meeting. c. P. Leitch was then, as now, the reputel owner of the Gazette. At that time he saw nothing wrong in publishing proceed ings which were not current. He not only published the proceedings of the board of control "up to and including the last meeting in 1885, but he kept right on publishing them after that year had ended. His paper was still keeping readers posted as to the do iEgs of the board of which he was a member when L. c. Hughes ceased to be governor and B. J. Frarklin bez came chief executive.
 During the time that T J. Woliey, who was appointed citizen member of the board by Governor Franklin, in place of M II. McCord, was fight ing in the courts for his seat on the board, the Gazette continued to pub lish the proceedings of the board. Was or was not this 8 case of t'the publication of the proceedings Of the board of control, during an admins tTation out of power over whose acts the succeeding administration could not under any semblance Of law pos sess curative power. if cure were really found to be a necessity"
 If The Republican did wrong, as the Gazette charges, in publishing pro- ceedings Of a board osher than that in power at the time of the publication, | who but the Gazette established the precedent? Who but c. p. Leitch, re- puted owner of the Gazette all this | time, and also auditor of the territory l and member of the board of control. planned, connived at and executed | this thing? As will be seen by the | dates above named, the Gazette pub iehed old proceedings covering . period of ten months. That paper was | still "flchinG," to use one of tho grievance mans terms, as late as July | %, 1896. At that time the new citizen member, T. h Wolfey. was firmly seated He suggested to the board tho | and the illegality of member of the territorial adE1inistra- ton letting himself job and then paying himself CT rather his newspa- per for the services rendered. He called the attention of Mir. Leitch to chapter 2, paragraphs 3062 3064 of the revised statutes. which reads 2s follows:
 3062. Sec. 1. Members of the 1cgis- lature, territorial, county, city and JI IGClutL OILSGIo III lust 1AAt oI lAt>S- SotNNt in any contract made by them in their official capacity, or by any body or board of which they are members.
 3G53. Sec. ?. Territorial, county, city and precinct officers must not be purchasers at any sale or vendors al any purchase made by them in their official capacity.
 3O64 Sec. 3. Every contract made n violation of any provision of the .wo preceding sections may De avoided |, It the instance of any party except the officers interested.
 Wolney also directed Leitch's at- ,ention to paragraph 104 of the penal code of Arizona, which reads as fol- ows:
 Every officer or p1-s3n prohibited by the laws of this territory from 1nak- ing or being interested in con -ractS or from becoming a vendor CT