Lewiston daily teller. (Lewiston, Idaho) 1900-1901, 1900-11-10

sioners was continued this morning in
the district court, the time being taken
up principally in receiving testimony
from County Auditor Stookey, the prose-
cution introducing record proof Of the al
legged fees and per diem charged by the
commissioners against the county.
Commissioner Black yesterday filed an
answer to the complaint Of which S. o.
Tannahill is informant.
In article one of the answer he admits
the allegations as contained in paragraph
one Of the complaint with reference to
his being duly elected and qualified
commissioner Of Nez Perce county and in
paragraph two denies that he knowingly,
or corruptly charged certain sums or cor.
ruptly collected the same from the
county, as alleged in paragraph two Of
the complaint and further denies that the
said charges (set out in paragraph three
of plaintiffs information) against the
county are illegal fees and denies further
that he knowingly, willfully or corruptly
charged or collected fees and per diem
las set out in the complaint) from Nez
Perce county.
There are eight paragraphs denying
his corruptly receiving fees, etc.. as set
out by itemized statements in the COM
plaint. For second further and sepa-
rate defence the defendant alleges that
he has been farmer by occupation and
in no way engaged in the practice of law
or study thereof and has held no Office
under the laws of the state, except as
road overseer, prior to being present
county commissioner, and he denies that
he has at any time during which time he
has held Office as county commissioner,
knowingly, wilfully or Intentionally
made any illegal charge against Nez
Perce county, and that all charges in his
bills were made in good faith, with an
honest belief that the same were correct
and proper charges. He also states that
defendant has, prior to making these
charges. consulted with certain attorneys
with reference to the charging Of the
days that he had actually been occupied
in his coming from and returning to his
home 80 miles from the county seat, and
attorneys advised him that he was en-
titled to charge and receive pay for each
day occupied in coming from and return
l.; t,a
entitled to charge while the board was in
session, and in view of this advice made
the charges as set forth.
He also noticed in the records of said
co mmissioners court that his predeces-
sors had made similar charges for similar
services, and he also says he received
from County Attorney F. Danford, both
oral aud written on the matter, the
written opinion being as follows:
"To the Board Of County Commission
ers, Gentlemen: 1t seems to me that a
fair construction of the Ii ws of this state
authorizes the members of your board to
examine and inspect the roads of your
districts for the purpose Of de-
and directing the kind, char
acter and amount of work to be done in
the several road districts of your county,
and that the law under such circum-
stances authorizes the compensation
therefor. Any other construction Of the
law, in my opinion, would preclude the
idea of your properly directing the work
required of you under our statutes.
VERY Respectfully,
"F. DANFoRD, Pros. Atty"
The third defense is taken up in eight
paragraphs setting out that the items