Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-02-17
cDUNC|LMENS PAY
WAS INADEQUATE.
lance Voted Extra Compensation
For Themselves
OFF. W. Chambers.
NEARING OF OTHER CAUSES
Today-Jurors Summoned to
Hear Cases Against Councilman
Craig and Moves.

ogden Feb. t7-city Councilman
vrsd W. Chambers expects to prove his
',rocense of the charges brought
.u.,rst him by j. d. Skeen,
'sa court having given him permission
,ut IN evidence to show that he
..rforned services for the city on
.pecIal committees and board of equal
',.bor and review OF special taxes dur
INV the past four years, for which he
,scslved the extra compensation of $50
,,r 1902 and 19O3 800 for 1904, and
uOO,5O for 1900
ciy Treasurer Il. A. Moyes produced
,bs records Of warrants paid by him,
Witch showed the warrants drawn In
.,ror NJ Mfr. Chambers for the amounts
a,entloned and the same were cashed,
NM, he said that Mr.. Chambers had re-
e,nded the money paid him on the last
warrant Of S100.5O.
Former city Councilman Il. j. Hen
dershot was called for the defense, To
questions put TO him by Attorney Mac
siIan he testified that he had served
ogden City during the years 1902 and
lS3 as city councilman. That soon
after his election, extensive improve
r,ents were commenced by the city In
naving and macadamlzing the streets,
rntting In sewers and other work,
which had required u great deal more
lime than had been expected by the
councimen when elected to the office,
and that they had found difficulty In
securing councilmen TO serve on the
various special committees and boards
because Of their being busy business
men and they felt that the compensa-
lion OF $40 per month was not sufft-
Gent 10 pay for the increased duties,
therefore, they consulted Mayor Glas-
mann on the proposition and he agreed
10 approve Of an extra compensation
for such work, and the councilmen
agreed among themselves that $50
would be fair extra pay for the work,
which amount they voted to each menu
Der, He said the council had often
discussed the proposition to pass a
new salary ordinance and increase the
salary Of councilmen, but they realized
that II they did, the increase would
only benefit their successors,
as the law provided that they
could not increase their own
nay during their incumbency In office,
witness said the mayor had told them
Il was perfectly plain that they must
have extra pay for the services rem
dered. as 1t was customary In salt Lake
City Provo and other cities to give
extra compensation to councilmen on
committees. He was asked II the city
attorney had been consulted on these
matters and replied that he did not
think so. but that he was present %he1
they were discussed and did not make
any objections and the council consi-
dered that his silence gave his approval
OF their action.
Judge Kimball put witness through
a very severe DISCRIMINATION, when
brought out the fact that the councilmen
did not pass new salary ordinance
because they thought their successors
could do the same as they had done, APP
proprlate to themselves whatever
amounts they thought would be just
compensation for what work they might
do
Ex-Counciman J. c. Nye testified
10 similar facts as the former witness.
HEARING OF OTHER CAUSES.
JuuBt tiONfh lileu oNdACh W f'V Nv
torneys that Saturday was the last day
On which the cause of Mr.. Skeen against
the other two councilmen, william
Craig and a. II. Moyes, charged with
similar offenses, could be commenced,
as the law provides that the trial Of
such cases must be commenced within
70 days from the date OF fling the ac-
cusations and today DIS the twentieth
day. The court therefore had the fol-
lowing named special jurors drawn
10 appear in court this afternoon az :
O'clock Charles w. Mayberry. II. w.
Treseder. William Moyes, Bernard 5.
Stone, Charles II. Ellsworth, Il. +. Reed
er, Anton Il. Christensen. Thomas N.
Jones, Robert w. Nav, Jonathan
Browning, Walter L. Holbrook, John
Hoxer. Aaron Jackson, William Pierce,
Walter w, Graiue.
District Attorney Halverson suggest
cd to the court that two juries be I'M
pannelled this afternoon, one to serve
In the Craig case and the other In the
Noyes case, and then continue the hear
ings. but just what action the court
Will take IN the case was not indicated.