Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1911-04-22
To the Citizens of Wa-Keeney Town
ship.


In reply to Mr.. Hutzels criticism,
/ wish to say that / don't DelleYe
that there has been any township
money wasted or wrongfully paid out
as every order or voucher was sworn
to before it was paid and l frequent
ly laid bills over till the next meet
ing if they didn't look right to me,
until we could make further inquiry.
When came into office as trustee, l
found that we had $1,000 on hand, and
a good many farmers and business
men said / should spend it and not
let it lay there for the bank to use
while it did US no good
The first year was one OF the WORST
for washouts and we spent in all
about S21OO. The next spring every
body called for good roads and we
started in early and spent nearly 3d.
600. And / will say that we have
done more roadwork in Wa-Keeney
township in the last two years than
had been done in ten years before.
We put three crossings across the Sa-
line and seven across Big Creek. One
of them is a 32-foot bridge; besides
that we put in over twenty small cul-
verts and bridges including three
across Trego Creek. We also used
nearly 100 lbs of dynamite and over
made good passable roads for teams
with loaded wagons where a man in
some cases could not>climb it on foot
before.
AS to us not being backward to
help ourselves to all we wanted, is
may look to be 50. Mr.. DietZ and
w. Williams, l am sure don't want
any more of that kind of work and
pay. There have been IL meetings;
Mr.. HutZel says so. Mr.. DietZ and
Mr.. Williams have each made S22 out
of nd
myself | never charged over - a day
for single handed work, nor did /
make any charge for horse or buggy.
l never charged over S3 day for my
self and team though the law allow
ed me $3.50 and | allowed my over
SeerS TO charge $3.50 for their work.
i never made any charges for my
roadScraper, plOwS, broken double
trees or cleyiSeS, of which there were
over dozen. But part of the time /
worked Is teams and 10 men and /
boarded some of them free of charge:
S. A. Shriner and w. NJ. Smith did
the same. We wanted the road
worked and we did what we could.
As to the amount on hand or the
levy, | confess / am surprised. Two
years ago / told Mr.. King that the
usual amount which | thought was
S120 would be enough and l told him
the same last year, but Mr.. King
must have misunderstood me and
made the usual levy which would in
crease the amount more than 3-fold,
as all property is now assessed a full
value instead of 1-3 value as before,
besides great big raise in land val
ueS.
l may be the road-overseer Mr.. Hut
Zel refers to, who received S410.60.
Sometimes / paid men with my own
personal check if they had to have
money before we had a meeting or if
they were going away. | once paid
out nearly $40 of my own money for
help, new road-ScraperS and freight.
We may not have been backward but
we could have been more forward to
the extent of 5000 or $500 and not vi
Olated the law either. | have even
turned down several bills that were
presented against the township and
we paid about 5000 worth of old bills
that were made prior to our time.
Now, Mr.. Givler, this is getting too
long so | can't answer all of Mr.. Hut
Zel'S allegations. / am not writing
this because / am stirred up or sore
but because | think it is only fair to
the citizens of the township who
have treated me so we'll and shown
me such kind hospitality which great
ly assisted me in my work. | am
glad Mr.. HutZel has brought this out
and so with malice toward none and
kind feelings toward all, i remain,
Yours truly,
II. B. Flyr
Don't use harsh physics. The re-