The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-08-13
Secretary of State Land Board
Refuses Taxpayer Permis-
sion to Examine Books.
HE WANTED TO KNOW
ABOUT PIUTE PROJECT
Refusal to Produce Public Rec,
Ords Would Indicate There
Was Something to Conceal.

If YOU should desire to see record
in the office OF the state board OF land
commissioners that is public record,
you can possibly see il whenever 1t suits
the whim caprice Of some clerk IN the
office. The secretary of the board on
Friday absolutely refused the request or
citizen and taxpayer OF Salt Lake ac-
cess to the public records OF his ONCE,
alleging as the reason that the clerk
who had the records in charge was de-
,ained at home and would not be pres
crt In the office until Monday. hence un-
he returned the books could not pe
IN. il might be that this clerk niGht
...c before Monday; result. the secrGutry
OF the land board would therefore nave
the records buried with the body ot the
employee.
What the Law Is.
CHAPTER IL of the revised statutes of
Utah pertaining 10 civil procedure, puoilc
'Citizens may inspect and copy public
writings. Every citizen has right to
inspect and take copy of any puG,ie
writing OF this state. except as othefWlse
expressly provided by statute.
Kinds OF public writings Public writ
ings are divided into four classes:
"First-LawS.
"Second-Judicial records.
"Third-Othcr official records.
"Fourth-Public records. kept in this
This taxpayer. who dcsirco 10 inspect
these records, wanted To look over the
expense account in connection with the
Piute reservoir project, which mater
was TO be considered by the board on Fri
dav 1t is alleged that there were eN-
Traordinary expenses in connection Win
this project that there were antomoone
rides and other matters Ike IT put IN
the expense bills; that an Impractical
theory in which a slulceway to cost
s5f000 or $50. 600 was to he cNperimentcd
with and this sum OF money virtually
burned
Had Right to Sec Records.
He likewise desired TO know who the
people were who were employed by the
president Of the land board upon TINS
project; whether or not they were all
from Sanpete county. in which county
this president OF the land board resided;
whether or no this same president OF the
land board was not building up pohu-
cal machine for himself; whether or no
there was graft in connection with the
scheme; whether or no there was any
outright thievery; III fact what tins ta%-
payer wanted WAS facts. He had ilsht
to know and the information when ne
sought was denied. He could not come
to any conclusion but one: tnar conclu-
sion was that there was something tnat
some one desired 10 conceal But these
records will be shown. II may be neces-
sary TO ask the courts for manoamus
TO compel the production Of these pnonc
records. and if It is necessary 'his VII
As to Piute Project.
When the board Of land commissioners
met ,on Friday morning there was a star
chamber session Reld. Later the doors
were thrown open and the common pub
lie was admitted. The Piute project was
10 I've considered \ representative OF the
National Bond and Trust COMPANY win
his attorney. was present He had SUD
Tnitted proposition Ia the board TO conf
ric,a the project and To take the war
rants of the state board upon the rcser-
vor fund. which warrants bear per cent
interest. at price not less than 10 cents
ON inc dollar the construction work TO be
done nj cost and the work 10 be let 10 the
lowest responsible bidder. which success
20 per cent OF the amount OF his con-
tract. The company also agreed 10 COL
orize the land at
81 80 per acre for first grade.
Ss 40 per acre for second grade.
81. 90 per acre for third grade.
this cost to be added 10 the state land
price. making total Of ABOUT 500 per
the water right. this. however. TO apply
only 10 the state lands. Water rights
sold To private owners OF land were to
be sold at actual cost Of the construction
OF the system.
Half Million Dollars Needed.
To complete the Pute project will re.
uuire an additional expenditure OF half
a million dollars. which would make the
entire cost OF the system S650.OO0. The
construction company-that' is. the Ma
tIonaI Bond and Trust company-agreel
to put MP a guarantee bond OF Sl0n 600
to have the system completed by April /.
1872.
II should be understood that the state
land board cannot complete the work IT
self for at least five years. while the con-
struction company would guarantee to
have il all completed in time for the
irrigation season of 1912. and that the
osition would not exceed SO per acre. and
still leave the matter in the hands OF
The state.
The construction company also agreed
to expend at least $4,000 In advertising
In the east for the opening. this adver-
tising TO be done by the spring of 1911.
protest coming from former Member OF
the Land Board Hayes OF SEWER county
and others. but this protest was finally
modified.
How Protest Was Arranged
This protest. it is said. was arranged
for by member of the land board and
Mr.. Hayes over the telephone the latter
being advised. so The Tribune Is In
formed. to get busy quicle-nnd Il was
done.
The board. at its meeting on Friday.
turned down the proposition of the Bond
and Trust company 10 complete the work
but deferred action on the proposal to
colonze the lands until the next regular
meeting of the board.
Now people Will become induisltive
They will ask questions. They will want
To know why the construction proposition
was turned down. VIII ask why a mem
bcr Of the hoard wanted a protest ncd
These inquiries Will lead To "a great many
things and there may have to be a great
deal Of explaining done.
OF course. the turning over OF the pro-
jcct 10 construction company would
take away all power from members oil
the board 10 put relatives in place: II
would stop the building up of a machine
This may he one of the reasons why the
Bond and Trust connpany's proposal was
turned down. But this is another story
ANNOUNCEMENT,
Owing 10 the ranid growth Of thc