The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-03-03

hood of S23ss. And neither were over ro
ImouIsed For the claim of the state
was denied ond II was never forced 10 an
issue by the authorities at the capitai.
IRE board manipulated county affairs ana
he people paid and looked pleasant %n.i
popuu. Nox Del! wa
Denial and Admission.
Here is the denial the admission md
geason Tor the denial 1t Is from .Joserh
STANFORD, chairman of the board 80
eommittee TO whom the claim wne me
ierred This document was promulsa ted
December -. 1902: P"iu'sated
I've herewith beg IN ohs.r
knowing the necessity existed tbe ,,raa Snat
ent oonrd or commissioners has henr
aware awe OF the fact that Assessor GIbson
rad been paying to some OF his dennt,on d1rpson
mounts exceeding tho law limit ann usiGs 4,
iehs mas always been willing to protect 'E MI II
iiTs1n sih,,n and share its part OF the respon 7
legally or Justly attach in name Ca, can
Ter tnat could not possibly be avnad
en; AZ me Same time the board has most
emphatically denied. and still do 90 most p
ing a party to the using OF othe, 81. DC
IN heG OF those who actuallV nnr,n,,a.es lanes
, INC h6 wor5 TO receive the extra pay, ana
iarIt,"S b Wae VIE; NOT aware of these irregu.
.e tdIlI,es having been permitted or nre
Gced until II became a matter ~ pl"S p,'i,
sta nc,ty through the local papers at The Pm IN
", S.,tioS Oh Some Demccratic correspopd-
election campaign" ''e recent
Then the chairman denied the cl0,,
u ,,aS - nus lever peen paid, Is that ''Dro
teeted graft or incompctency? Is tbot p1o
politics or is ii government? Djd ,i. tint
realize that 1t was the taxpayers n,oneS ,nS
u ina, ,so was s. being squandered (the term term
- m Gsee nseo III, IN courtesy1 or did they think
II was their own when they induleed In
such profigacy? seu IN
How 1t Was Done.
And here is an instance OF bou, &,
done George NJ. Hansen was den%,S, 49,
In the office of Treasurer Chambers @S Az
oordlng TO the detailed claim aiaa ~ "
state Auditor Tingey, warrants veys
made out TO J. NJ. Hansen, a brother o5
George. FOR various amounts, bur GeorSe
signed the warrants and cashod ms, g.
and thus violated the law but the Som-
mssioners did not know f. SO tbc,. Sa'
although they passed the bills anIIio5 @ say y,
Clerk G. r. Hollingsworth The stot,',y
provided that no deputy could drau, ai'', 10
money except his stipulated salary. Han.
sen could not act in a dual csnncJtr
and he didn't. so fnr MS the warrants
referred TO are concerned During NaS
and June, 1889. j. NJ. Hansen had war
eating $3.50. Against these warrants
In his report, State Auditor Tingey
says: No work done" But George
signed for the warrants. In May and
the name OF J. NJ. Hansen aggrcrating
500. State Auditor Tingey records
against them, NO work done" George
signed for them, they were cashed tho
County Commissioners knew nothing
about it, Protected graft" or In
competency, which, The choice is yours
George NJ Hansen Is now secretary to
Senator Sutherland. Political prcferment
for premeditated and successfully nc
complished graft. is that the motto? But
the Commissioners knew II not
Another Method Was Pursued.
But there was another method. and one
instance will suffice. In 1902 warrants
aggregating S2ila 20 were drawn in the
names OF II. a. Sims. J. ] Barker, B r
Blaylock, L. II. Carver, George d Folk
man, f. a. Miller and /. A Stone State
Auditor TinEcy records against these war
rants, In hoe sigma vncit" or rather
mo work done" The following ladies'
and gentlemen signed for the warrants:
a. l.. Toone, ], Storey, S. l.. Gibson
Julia a Marks, w r Swan, ]. W. Glib
son. They got the money Protected
graft" or incompetency, which? Who did
the work.
The Bounty Frauds.
And so utterly Indifferent to the law
had all the officials become that theft ah1
fraud became rampant on a comprehe6-
sivc scale. The logical conclusion IA: Had
''Drotertp5 tbpra