Little Falls weekly transcript. (Little Falls, Morrison Co., Minn.) 1894-19??, 1900-01-26

Landau. and one BY Landau to
comprl Meyer to issue them. The
county board had adjourned until
the 10Th, and hearing on both the
court cases was postponed until Jan.
20. The county board had expected
to act on the bridge matter, but
when such action was abandoned
members had no reason for meeting.
Upon that development the county
treasurer delivered the signed re-
ceipts to Mr.. Landau. The docu-
ments show that they had been
signed once by Mr.. Meyer, the sigma
lures erased, and then signed.
Since the practical conclusion OF
the whole matter the Royalton Ban
ner has published certain 'informa-
ton" that is made grounds for an
attack OF Attorney Rhodes and the
Transcript. Mr. Rhodes needs no
defense for the legitimate practice OF
his profession. The criticism OF the
Transcript is based on the failure OF
this paper to record on the date OF
its occurrence the action of the board
in the abatement matter, and
charges it with attempting to con-
ceal the matter from the Taxpayers.
All that is necessary to say Is that
the reporter is not able to get COM
plete reports OF davis proceedings
until after the Daily has gone to
press, and he does not attempt to
do so. The auditors records are
not available during the boards ses-
sion until after 5 in the evening,
and the reporter gets what ne can,
which is always incomplete. The
had no object or interest
in suppressiny anything the board
did, and according to the Banners
own statements Mecusker, who has
shown the only activ" interest aside
from that displayed by buchanan.
knew of the whole matter within an
hour or two after it occurred. 1t is
certain that Meyer, who has been
displayed by the Herald as SO
anxious to protect the county,
knew all about it, as his advice and
solicita ton secured the passage of the
accepting the offer OF Lam
dahl.
The facts seem that Landlord Me-
cusker, of the Buchanan, desired to
the new owners of the
Antlers hotel, if he could do so with
Of profit to himself. II
any one not interested in the hotel
property had desired to make Il bid
for IL tax title the opportunity has
been open for years. But no one ap'
peared to want it at any price.
But after landau had made an Of
fer Of $l5OO, and it had been unanim-
ously accepted, and it was. public
that new owners had re-
Gently become interested, it was evil
dent to A[ecusI>er that they might he
forced to put in a little more money
before they would lose the property.
Therefore he male a ibid" of $4,000,
raising Landau 1000. but still re-
81. 00O below the total back
taxes, interest nnl penalty. which
lit had been possible from
a legal and practical standpoint
to have obtained n Reputation OF
the landau settlement, and all APP
prevail OF the Mccusker Offer, then
Mecusker would have obtained a tax
title to the Antlers property FOR
$1,000 less than onc-hali of it's as
sessed value Then tn" new owners.
who had already invested money in
the hotel, would have either to lose
their recent Investment or redeem the
by paying the taxes. 1t
could Dc redeemed i'm two ways; one
wonl he to pay the county the full
sum OF $4,000, or buy Mr.. Merusker's
tax title. II the owners paid the
county Mr.. Mecusker would
receive back his $4,000 and inter.
est. I! the owners decided
to redeem they would certainly me-
gotiate with the man who held the
$3.50 tax title before they took the
and paid the county
$500. The owner of the tax title
under such circumstances would ma
tur and about as much as he
he could get, and the own
ers would be willing to pay him a
profit II they could also save
q considerable sum from the price
needed to redeem from the county.
The whole plan of Mecusker there
fore seems to have been a tax title
investment by Mecusker in which he
felt sure he could come out even and
probably make something out of the
men who were about to open a rival
hotel.
County Treasurer Meyer refused to
give the receipts to Landau because
Alderman Mecusker, backed by Sen
Of pp,o1,,,oov, 1nc{,o1 III, +~ 10