The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1911-11-28

The News, last week, stated that Their
was opposition to the action of the Boart
Of Freeholders In authorizing bono
issue on the sum of $4,000, to pay cleo
ton expenses, when that sum was at leas
| 81, 900 In excess of the amount actually
needed. The resolution, If we are cor
rectly informed. was drawn by Budd M
Rigg, solicitor of the board, after he had
been informed that $4,000 was the proper
sum. Somebody had just guessed at the
amount, or else there was a hidden motive
In getting SO much money. Mr.. Rigg was
asked, Ilast week, to give the wording Of
the resolution, as he acted as clerk of the
board at Its last meeting. He said he could
not remember the substance, as the reso
luton was In the minute book at his Office.
He did admit, however, that the action
was incorrect, that the resolution was
worthless, and that the proceedings would
all have to be gone over again.
TIE News also stated that legal gen.
tleman had said he would, If the so, 600
was insisted upon, institute certiorari pro-
ceedings against the issuance of the bonds.
The following will show that he meant
what he said, and we give in full letter
he has sent to the solicitor of the board.
1t is as follows:
Budd M. Rigg, Esq,
Attorney at Law,
Burlington, N. ].
My dear Budd:-
1t seems to me and to some other tax
payers of Burlington county that 1t is
about time for some one to take sufficient
interest In public affairs and stop the ille-
gal practices of the Board of Freeholders.
Before taking them In court wish to give
friendly warning through you, having no
feeling of animosity against any of them,
and desiring above all things that they
shall not get themselves int legal diff
Guilty.
First with reference to the deficiency In
the appropriation for election expenses. l
am Informed that SO, 900 was appropriate
ed to meet election expenses, which
amount to $4,000, or little over, leaving
deficiency of about $1,000. Some sort
of resolution was passed or action taken
liking to the borrowing of $4,000 to
meet this deficiency. At present am not
disposed to cavil about the borrowing of
money to meet the deficiency, and have
not looked up the law to determine how
that best can be done, or how 1t ought to
be done, bat of one thing am convinced,
and that is that the Freeholders have no
right to issue bonds to the amount of
SIC, 900 for the purpose of meeting a de-
ficiency of Sc, 000-and II that is attempted,
l shall myself, If no one else will join
with me, sue out writ of certiorari for
the purpose of setting aside any such
action.
Now with respect to your next years
appropriations, want to call your atten-
ton formally to matter that Is already
within your knowledge as a lawyer and
the solicitor of the board, namely, that
the board has right and duty to
appropriate sufficient money for each of
the specific objects for which money can
be expended by the board, but there is no
such thing In law as an Incidental APP
or miscellaneous appro-
priation. In other words instead of
having as at present a miscellaneous
which Is practically bank
from which the Freeholders draw to meet
deficiencies In other appropriations, they
have the right to make the appropriations
for the different objects as large as they
see fit. or as in their judgment the neces-
stiles will warrant. and can then, IL they
require. transfer any surplus from any
specific appropriation to any other specific
There are number of tax
payers who do not propose to allow the
next budget to contain an incidental or
account, and If 1t Is at
tempted, we shall remove, by certiorari,
the whole appropriation.
1t Is easy for the board to avoid this by
simply making the different specific
large enough to meet the
objects for which the money is to be ex-
pended, and they will then keep them
selves entirely within the law.
You will understand this is not intended
as threat, and must not be taken that
way. but is friendly advice to you In order
that you may properly advise the board
and its committees. AS a matter of course
I do not attempt to dictate to you, and II
you do not agree with me you will then
advise the board and its committees as
you understand the law to be, and it may
become necessary for the Supreme Court
to decide which of us is right.
Yours very truly,
Nov. "a, 1911. j. FL. GAsKILL.