Emmons County record. [volume] (Williamsport, D.T. [i.e. N.D.]) 1884-current, 1908-10-22

belong TO the same HerOlx-Pattersol
com bination that for the last eigh
years has practically dominated
Everything at the county building
And, after the question Of the lie
gality Of the work had been raised.
after it had been shown that prac-
tically every state Law safeguardinl
the letting Of county work had beef
violated, the courthouse gang moi
only ..let bids. for the bridge already
built. but they 1t the same meeting
paid out fifteeen hundred dollars o.
the county's good money for that
bridge.
But Herolx defends them and Pat
terson defends them.
Every dirty muckraker that went
about the county circulating the cir
cular futile Exposed" procured By
Herolz and published by Patterson.
defends them.
And yet the fact remains that the
board of county commissioners Of
Emmons county have been guilty Of
the rankest kind Of malieasance il
ONCE in that they have repeatedly
violated the plain letter of the Law.
and. when courteously showl
that they have violated the Law
instead Of attempting to reconsider
their illegal action, they attempt to
squirm out Of the law-breaking di-
lemma by doctoring the records of
thc.' meeting.
We beg leave to inform these
gentlemen that the end is not yet.
They and their tools may denounce
the editor Of the Record to theil
hearts content. This isn't our firs,
contest with graft and grafters in
this county, and We assure them we
are enlisted for q fight to the finish.
Last week Commissioner Sher
wood. in frequent consultation with
Nr. Herolz, was busily engaged fol
day or SO 10 what he said was {
defense Of the commissioners in the
bridge steal. Messrs. Patterson and
Herolz we're telling the people that
it would show that the commission
efs had done nothing wrong. You
have that explanation printed
above. Reader, do you understand it:
II so, the editor of the Record hasn',
found anybody here in Linton who
DOES understand 1t. And it doesn't
say word about the $40 worth Of
repair work let to the Hennepir
Bridge Company 1t the May meeting,
with NO one being allowed to bid
against that company.
And yet the law says that invita-
tions for bids must be advertised
thirty days where the amount is more
than 500. and that specification.
must be published.
Do they explain the fact that LEI.
ting bridges without giving oppor'
tunity for competition not only VIC
lates the law, but gives ample OF
portunity for collision between ras
calls in ONCE and rascals who bid
Do they explain why the Hennepln
Bridge Company can build bridge.
for less without advertisements than
with Il.
They say in their explanation: .
Mr.. Roberts did state to tn. board
that. IL the board would give him the
contracts without advertising Cha;
3, If they would break the di
rect command Of the laws they had
sworn to obey, he could save the
county $500 or 500 on the three
bridges
Did Mr.. Roberts (the representa-.
tive of the trust corporation, the
Hennepin Bridge Company lex
plain to the commissioners HOW
he would save the amount named to
the county IL the commissioners
would violate the law?
II he did SO explain" Why did
not Messrs. Sherwood and Herol,
explain" in the aboye-printed "ex
planation?"
/ Does Mr.. Sherwood expect the pub
lie to believe that Mr.. Roberts was
out here for his health or in tn,
Interest Of the taxpayers Of Emmon,
county. and was "just dying to say.
said taxpayers six or seven hundred
dollars?
1t is to laugh!