Shoshone journal. [volume] (Shoshone, Idaho) 1884-1931, 1912-04-05
M|LLSAPS TELLS
HIS SIDE OF CASE
The Reason for Bringing Action
and Why He Thinks Ex-
penses Oxorbitant

Nj. GultOI.
THAT appeal is what | want to
talk about.
The object of that appeal was
to show the county commission
ers and the people that the ex-
pense of running Lincoln county
was much greater than it should b
and the commissioners either did
not know how or did not want TO
cut ii down.
The Massey mixup along with
ether matters was brought TO their
attention at their Aprl 1911 ses-
sion but they were very reluctant
about making any changes.
At the July 1911 session the at
tentiOn of the commissioners was
called to the extra large expense
account and Speakman, the chair
ran of the board, asked TO be
shown where extravaganza enter
ed into any of their transactions
and he was shown among other
things that il cost this county
about So. per assessment to assess
a thickly settled precinct. When
shown this they said they would
not allow the bill-but they did
allow it just the same. One bill
of this kind amounts only to few
collars but a few dollars here and
a few dollars there runs into the
thousands.
Speakman appeals to you tax
payers to be allowed to spend your
money in attending conventions at
Boise. Not satisfied with that he
wants to take a guardian along to
spend the money for them, so he
invites the clerk to go with them.
Hence the expense bill of 500. was
brought in by the clerk and allow
ed by the commissioners for ex-
penses of the Boise trip.
Now 500. expense does not amount
TO much to county like ours, but
If the executives are allowed to
spend 500 for one trip not required
. iaw. what is to hinder them
from taking forty such trips and
al much greater expense. And
again, if it were necessary for the
commissioners to go to Boise, why
invite their friends to go along,
also at the expense of the county.
Speakman says in his article of
last week that 'Millsaps and Both
we'll had to admit in writing before
the court that all the expenditures
were necessary and reasonable.
This is not the case. We did ad-
init that the expense and the help
in the assessors Office was nee
essary at the time it was allowed.
But who was responsible for this
necessity? Let us see:
Governor Hawley notified the as
SCISSORS and the county commission
ers that they must assess their
respective counties at their actual
cash which is the law-and
in the matter of fixed levies such
as the school levy, they were not
required to raise more money than
was needed to run their schools.
Instead of reading the law for
themselves and acting on their own
judgment as they were elected and
expected to do. they took Govern
or Hawley's advise apd fixed the
school levy at 21s mnls instead of
) mills which the law requires and
the assessors rolls We're extended
on the 215 mill levy.
About this time suit was
brought in court TO test the valid
Hy of rate levied below the min
imum lawful rate anu in the latter
part of the year the supreme court
OF Idaho decided that the county
commissioners must Obev the law
TIT SAINT do othti ptOplt- tAllu
tins aci of the county commission
ers is exactly what caused or
created the necessity for the great
amount of help used in the assess
ers office the latter part of the
year. After making this mistake
the rolls had to be changed and
several thousand new notices had
TO be sent out to the taxpayers.
This took time and help. But say
again, who was responsible? Gov
ern0r Hawley? That is about what
the commissioners will tell you
They have to lay the blame on
some one. If the Governor had
told them to disobey any other
steal, for instance-1 wonder
what they would have done.
The commissioners give bonds |
to the county to perform certain
duties and do certain things and if
they fail, no matter who advises
them or what the advise is, they
are responsible and they aione.
FRANK MIIJSAPS.