The Tucson citizen., 1902-01-28

A. Yes, sir.
O. What influenced you 10 with
draw your opposition
A. Consultation with the Auditor
and the Attorney General, Mr.. Vickers
and Mr.. Ainsworth both said 10 me
substantially that, II Mcneil and my
self and the parties Interested would
consent to have the council bill go
through with this section stricken out,
that they would issue warrants after
the adjournment OF the Legislature
| @. That promise was made by
Vickers on the floor of the House?'
A. II said, if you and the Attorney
General VIII step forward and make
this statement fully 10 the Legislature,
| will withdraw my opposition to this
amendment"
O. did they make this statement
publicly to the Legislature?"
A. Yes. sir.
The Legislature adjourned on the
10th day of March, and on the 18th
of March, the Auditor. in pursuance
OF this corrupt agreement, and In d"
tiance of the refusal of the Legislature
t. appropriat the money. issued the
following warrants;
1899:
March II. N. A. Morford,. ITO 5 $500
March II H. II. Mcneil Co IL 7070
March II c. p. Leitch -. IT. I26.oo
March II Arizona Re-
publican" .... ...,,,.. l'3 7oo.oo
Total ......,. ........... S@ooo.oo
(Auditor's Report 1900. p. 80
b. The Legislature of 1899 deter
mined to stop this scandalous business
and repealed the law of 1897, directing
that the Biennial Reports of the Terri
tCrial officials ne printed. Such reports
for the year 1900 were, nevertheless.
printed under private contract with The
Arizona Republican. and warrants
were issued by the Auditor to the Re-
publican to pay therefor.
No provision of law existed which
provided for or authorized the printing
OF such reports.
The law directs the several officers TO
make their reports to the Governor.
thus imposing upon them as QUE OF
their duties the duty to prepare and
ender such report.
This expenditure was the subject of
Legislative investigation The Attorney
General Ainswolth. testified under
oath before ;hn Legislative Co1nlitce
nat in his Opl1ip" tntsa tM"'rs III
the performance CT their duty Ia make
the r ports. wer" at liberty 70 make
them in print. and, he concludes, that
the printing OF the reports md the
expenditure of the money Thereon were
HE
Il believe tha' the Board had the
right to make thu report N taeir o WI
way. either in manuscript typewriting
or in print. | t!lnk they lad the right
to say how they would max the re-
port
1t is respectfully submitted Cat in
asmuch as the Legislature provided
a salary for these Territorial officials
and imposed Ger ain tiles up.h them
and afforded them limited Gle teal as
sistance, it WAS me duty of these on
ciaIs to make 'nese reports either
without aid, or st their own expense:
and. that thu plea OF the Attorney
General that nasmucn as the .aw did
not specify v!,":Her the reports should
BE- made in manuscript or IN type
" lIliiS VI ili Pi AhAs tbN ohaANNiH - W.
at liberty TO print them at the ex pense
of the Territory. was both disingenuous
and bad law.
tc) BY Chapter Of the Laws of
1897. the Live STOCK sanitary Board
was instructed to pr pare AMI print
Brand Book bu, failed 10 appropriate
the money to pay therefor.
when t'e l.oaIA issued specifications
and asked for bids for the printing of
this book they stated in the specif1.
cations that they could not guarantee
payment. ne inevitable inference
from this statement in the specifica-
tions was, that the Territorial officials
would be unwilling. under the existing
law, to issue warrant; and taat pay
ment for the work would be contin-
gent upon future legislative appropria-
tion. II. Fl. Mcneil, the proprietor Of
one OF the large printing establish
ments of PhOeDX. testified under oath
before the legislative committee that
he inquired of the Territorial officials.
and was informed that no warrant
would be issued unless the legislature
should appropriate therefor. IF. Me
Neil thereupon refused to Did.
Ht Spt' ll' dllbnS pTONIueu IOr n
book OF 400 pages and to contain 5000
brands. The work was given to the
Arizona republican at the agreed
price of $3.l00. me book when printed
consisted of but 205 pages. and con-
tained only 5000 brands.
lmmeGiatel" upon It's completion
and withou, any legislative appropria-
tion, warrant for the full amount
t$3,l0m was given to the Arizona ..e-
publican eAuditor's Report 1900, p.
CD
The issuance of this warrant was
improper and .egal. for the following
reasons
First. There was no provision of
law for the issue of any warrant. under
any circumstances howsoeyer Just the
claim might have been.
Second. The statement in the
specifications that the payment would
not be guaranteed, drove off compe-
tuVe bids and the matter became one,
which. apart from any other consider
alton GbnllI have l,f