Mexico Missouri message., 1910-04-07

ing his duty in an honorable way then
you should present your charges to
the Grand Jury and cause an investi-
cation to be made However, / am
charitable enough to think that you
have drawn on q keen Imagination or
merely been controlled by prejudice
as to facts as they really exist and
consequently for your information L
will state the following facts:
Section AIS, Laws of 1909, gives
the County Court authority and en-
.courages them to give donations to
county fairs. Read for yourself.
Wooden culverts are put in and main
tanned by the road overseers. AS an
ex-road overseer you should know
this and if Sailing Township is in
such dire need of wooden culverts.
why did you not put a few in your
district, while road overseer, you
were road overseer two of the last
six years you refer to. Not since |
have been member of the Court has
there been a bridge promised that
was not put in. The present Court
is not much on promising that which
it cannot fulfill. No the citizens did
not offer to pay half of the expense or
any part of the expense of putting in
steel bridge to replace the Dean
bridge and it was not rebuilt with
water-oak lumber. Through a mis-
take of one of Mr.. Considine's men,
some water-oak lumber was hauled to
the work and placed in the bridge
but when Mr.. Considine' s attention
was called to the matter it was taken
out and replaced with contract lum-
Der at no expense to the county ex-
cept for the carpenters work. lex
! aD1inn thp rnnnrHc
did not and will not pay any tele-
phone bills contracted for by Mr..
Wakefield in his performance of duty
and, emphatically no, l did not tell
Mr.. Wakefield in your presence, or
anyone else's presence, that the Court
would pay his expenses to Centralia
and for rig, etc. Look at the records,
ask Mr.. Wakefield. As for the $3.50
lumber, no such bill has been pre-
sented by Mr.. Wakefield. The lumber
you refer to at Rush Hill cost the
county S2.61 and not $3.50. Examine
the records.
AS to my signing the petition,
hasten to say that I will not l sim
cerely believe that the office of High
way Engineer is of benefit to the
county and l will not sign petition
to abolish it and then vote for its re-
tention. However, understand me
that | have no quarrel with anyone
who does not see as | do and when
YOUR petitions are presented to the
Court, in so far as | am concerned,
they will receive all fair considera-
ton. | will accept full responsibility
for my every act and deed as a mem
Der of the County Court and | am
sure that the other members share
the same views and will submit it at
the general election if petition
signed by ten per cent. of the voters
is presented to the County Court
Hence, my action in the matter will
be in all fairness, Notwithstanding
the fact that l believe that it was
petty jealousy and animosity that
prompted you to father the move
ment.
Now, for final question. Since you
evaded answering it in your commu-
nication, l will repeat it for it is the
main issue between us and is of the
most vital interest to the tax payers
of the county:
viii you, if upon the County Courts
legal advisors opinion that the
election, for which your petitions
pray, would be illegal if held in con-
junction with the State Primary,
to have the petitions withheld to
such a time that the matter of
abolishing the office of Highway En-
gineer can be voted upon at the gem
eral election in November and there
by save the county the expense of a
special election that the presentation
of the petions will make mandatory?
The present Highway Engineer IS
employed until February, 1911, and
action upon this matter at the
November election will, beyond doubt,
not only be legal, but economical as
we'll.
Yours truly,
Alex. Carter.