Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1906-02-23
THAT TAX LIST PUBLICATION.
4 Complete Statement Of The Matter
From Start to Finish.
No. l4,459.
Thomas Brown. ct al,
VS..
Ehe State Of Kansas, ex rel.
Error from Barton County.
AFFIRMED.
By the Cnnrr

S'A"uS Dy the court Porter, J.
The board Of county commissioners Of Bar-
ION county made contract with the publisher Of
the official county paper to publish list sbovinu q
the personal property statements Of all persons
IN the county, returned by the assessors. with
ihe amount Of personal property listed or assessed
against each person, for which publication and
the mailing Of copy to each person named
therein the board agreed to pay the publisher
siSO. The contract was entered into and carried
out in good faith HELD, that the contract was
ULTRA WIRES and void, and that a perma-
nent injunction was properly granted in an ac-
sion commenced on the relation Of the Attorney
General to enioin the payment Of the contract
price.
an the justices cOncurring
true cppy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
hAh' Clerk Supreme Court.
The foregoing tells the whole
story Of the finish of what has be-
come known as Ira Clark's in
junction suit, although he nor his
echo, Joe Cooke, ever would as
sumo responsibility for the same
until it had been won. The
syllabus not only refutes the
charge made by the opposition of
graft in the contract, but clearly
shows that not only was this con-
tract made by the commissioners,
but also that many other con-
tracts that have been made by
former boards, are void.
We will not tire our reader s
with a lengthy argument on the
subject, but wish to plainly set
out the case from our standpoint:
In January 1904, at the regular
meeting of the commissioners, the
queStion of publishing the person
al property list was discussed by
the commissioners who had in
mind that this would have the
effect of bringing out property
for taxation that had been escap-
ing,. and which the tax roll totals
for that year show was the case.
W. E. Stoke, the county printer,
was called in and asked to name a
price for this publication and for
sending a copy of the Democrat,
which at this time was the official
county paper, to every person on
the list. The price named was
$4,000. No contract was made
at this time, but it was the under
standing that the list would be
published. On the first Monday
in March when the assessors met
to place valuations, at the latter
end of the meeting this PROPOSE
tion was presented, and a major
ity of those present sanctioned the
move. When the commissioners
met in regular session in April,
the matter was again gone over
with the county printer, and the
contract spoken of revised a trile,
and price of $4,000 made for
the work. Also about this time,
Mrs. G. P. Townsley, represent
ing the Tribune, called on the
county clerk to ascertain concern
ing the letting of this contract.
She made an effort at that time tc
have the publication made in hel
paper as we'll as in the officiaI
county paper, but no contract wa:
made. Also about this time the
Tribune and the Register begar
atirade against this publication
for reasons apparent to us
which will be given later. Tn,
next week the Leader, a professet
independent paper published by
Republican postmaster in a Demo
crat precinct echoed the move O
the other papers. The thre,
papers aired the proposition con
siderably and talked in columns o
editorials Of how the count,
money was being squandered an,
what graft it was, aud how til
people were wrought up over tn
matter, ending up by threatenin
injgpction proceedings if the pla
. was carried out. They of cours
we're backed up by those VIII
we're afraid or rather ashamed t
have their personal tax values put
lished and those who had bee