The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-04-30

dual denounced the Examiner as pub.
lie enemy and had his tame board Of
supervisors pass resolutions concerning
"Stnl, everybody knows TODAY what
happened to Schmitz. And eyerypody
today would rather have Schmltzs abuse
than his commentator.
when the New York Journal first at
tackled and exposed District Attorney
Jerome that outraged prosecutor rushed
into print TO denounce the Journal and
TO abuse and sue me. Still everybody
knows what happened 10 jerome, and
what happened 10 the libel suit and most
people today would rather be sued by
Jerome than praised by him.
Now. | know perfectly well what is
going TO happen TO you. Mr. Mayor.
'"rhc people are going eventually TO
find you out and rePTGiiate Tia,, ri,Ss Eon and Tan
And even those newspapers that are
now trucking and lickspittling To you In
the hope or securing the city advertising
Will in the end sacrifice these lucrative
contracts for the priceless privilege OF
telling the truth about you.
For the mayor, Robert Adamson. his
private secretary, gave out the following
statement made before the mayor had
seen Mr.. Hearsts statement:
Answer Of Gaynor.
"'rhe mayor is not required 10 sign
warrants at all. They are made out and
signed by the comptroller and then by
the chief clerk OF the mayors office, Un-
der authority OF the charter. over 2,0,-
900 such drafts are signed in year.
some days over hoo. The mayor has
never signed one. The (Cohalan) claim
tax suits. Several lawyers were paid.
including Judge CAlton b. Parker, The
claim was audited and filed last Decern-
ber after much evidence was taken, and
thereby became total claim against the
city. Mayor Gaynor never had anything
to do with it,
Comptroller Prendergast gave out a
81 ,r, aI nf Nv 1Ip1 vet
substantiating some OF Mr.. iearsts
statements in substance as follows:
II told Mr.. Matthewson (the deputy
comptroller) that had come 10 the con-
clusion that the warrant having passed
the comptroller's office. IL would not be
a proper thing for me to recall il, thus
reflecting upon the action OF my prede.
cessor, unless there was some excellent
reason why the warrant should not have
been paid; that the mere fact the war
rant was in favor OF Mr.. Cohalan did
not constitute any such reason, but that
had made up my mind TO talk to the
mayor about IL.
About ! o'clock on that day CNew
Years day) | called upon the mayor and
told the mayor Just what 1 have des-
crlbed above. He asked me why Mayor
Mcclellan had taken tho action he did.
told him I did not know the reasons.
He then asked me what the warrant rep
resented. and told him my understand
ing was that II was for services In con-
nection with disputed franchise tax
cases.
Tie then said TO me, We must be
very careful about paying large bills TO
lawyers I'm these matters. The mayor
then said: If YOU had not told me about
this. / suppose the matter would have
gone right through in The ordinary
course.
Il said I presume that is what would
have happened
''He then replied: 1T is very nice OF
you TO speak of this 10 me. What ought
We to do about t?''
II told him that If he wanted 10 re-
turn the warrant TO the comptrollerS Of
flee | would be very glad 10 make re-
port 10 him upon it,
Clarence j Shearn. counsel for the
Hearst interests. called at the comp
trollers office today and his visit
raised the instant sIipposition that legal
action might result from Mayor GavnorS
address. The district attorney said to-
night, however. that no steps looking to-
ward such action had yet been taken
through his office