Graham guardian. [volume] (Safford, Ariz.) 1895-1923, 1911-06-02
NUNC PRO TUNc

Bishop, through the Bulletin,
charged Assessor Birdno with at
tempting to make Graham a firs'l-
class county by adding $500 per
acre to cultivated land. In corn
mon with Mr.. Bishop and eve ny
other tax payer, The GUARDIAN
knew that the assessment being lev
led by the assessor was in accordance
with an agreement arrived at by the
assessors of the Territory at Phoe-
nix last winter, and that all the
counties were being assessed alike,
so that Graham would not be pay
ing more Territorial tax than other
counties. Two weeks ago we showed
this fact plainly.
Mr.. Bishop was very much cha.
grined atour plain statement of facts,
for in the following issue of the
Bulletin, he came out with TRADE
of abuse of the assessor, resembling
more the antics of a mad bull in a
china shop, than an editor who had
discovered some great wrong in a
public official, which he was trying
to prove.
If Birdno is able to control men
and circumstances as Mr.. Bishop
says he has. he should not be as
SCISSOR of Graham county: he should
be President of the United States.
Mr.. Bishop accuses Birdno of draw
ing money for deputies illegally.
The amount that he states was
drawn is correct, but he did not 60
far enough. Mr.. Birdno informs w
that in both 1910 and 1911 he asked
the board for $3.50, the exact
amount spent for deputies, and was
allowed 81, 900 in 1910 and 81, 100 in
1911, Mr.. Webster not being pres
ent in 1911, but the amount OF
81. 100 being allowed by MeSSrs.
Dowdle and Prina.
The law says that $4,000 per year
may be expended for deputy as
SCISSORS In counties with an assessed
valuation of over 100000. The
first-class counties, outside of Ora
ham, expend this amount, some of
them employing chief deputy for
twelve months each year at SIPS
per month, and in Yavapai county
the personal expenses of the assessor,
when away from his office, is paid
by the county. The most that Ora
ham county has ever paid was S25OI
ess than the actual cost of deputy
assessors. Yet Mr.. Bishop claims
that the county got the worst of it'll
through its board of supervisors.
The attack made upon the assessor
~ Mr.. Bishop is almost a duplicate
IT the attacks made upon the same /,
'fficial by the Journal during the {
line ne was working to raise the
mining companies to the proper
Every one knew at the
ime that the Journal was started
or the purpose of thwarting the as y
essor in that undertaking, but it \
allied. and so will the Bulletin in it's I
resent despicable scheme. Y
OF course, Mr.. Bishop would not
ave ranted quite so much had he a
OF had a few advisors, men who
expected to reap little political .
restige by their advice, but they a
i'd not expect the TRADE that Mr..
'ishop's full soul overfowed, neith- s
r did they expect him to show his
and as a corporation tool as plainly p
$ he did. q
In attempting to convince the peo- $,
lie that he is not a tool of the cor n
he published in the last L
ulletin list of men with enormous
ealth, showing that their land is b
orth many times the amount it is N
ssessed at, Should the Territorial Il
oard of equalization take Mr.. a
ishop's statement as the value of 9.
md in the valley. that body would Ell