The Daily Missoulian., 1912-10-23

diSsoula county changed from
ourth to a third class county and
the board of county commissioners
allowing deputy at Bonner to be
paid by the county. while under the
administration of Mr. Graham the
commissioners allowed only $50 per
month for that deputy, while the peo-
pie of Bonner paid the difference.
Have my opponents, in their zeal to
discredit my administration, explained
to the people this difference in the in
crease In the EXPENSE Of the office?
Certainly not. because 1t is not the
truth they are seeking nor do they de-
sire to publish anything that will shed
any light on the matter. They desire
to leave the impression that all this
money has been going into my pock-
cts, and for that same reason they
have not explained that the only part
Of this increase of $4,000 that goes to
the sheriff is the sum of $3.50, being
the increase in his salary. II my
term has been so expensive as charged
by my opponents, have they given the
people any information as to the
causes Of this increase? They have
had access to records, as shown by
their statements and Investigations,
yet no explanation has been forth
coming simply because they know the
truth would not serve their purpose.
Anyone inspecting the records would
know Of the increase in theS expense
OF the office due to change in the
classification OF the county and the
expense Of the deputy stationed at
Bonner, yet 1t has been happily passed
over by the investigators searching
my record for some flaw to promote
their own interests.
Has the gentleman who signed the
article in The Missoulian Of the 22nd
instant as "A Voter" and who says
that at the end of my present term
l will have spent Approximately
$4,000 more than the previous sheriff
taken this increase of $4,000 I'M sal
aries and additional deputies into con-
sideration in his approximate esti-
mate? The absolute unreliability Of
the article may be best judged by the
fact that the gentleman desires to
the open and let the people also Judge
Of the Importance to be attached to
your statements.
AS shown by a previous statement
issued by me the difference In the
board of county prisoners from Janu-
ary !. 1903. to August 81. 1910, In
the administration. Of Mr.. Graham, ana
like periods Of 40 months In my
own administration from Januasy /,
1911 to August 81, 1912, was $21.50. Il
this an indication that my term Is, as
charged, 80 expensive when compared
with that OF other sheriffs? In the
article in the Republican Of date OF
October 22nd instant appears the
statement that the report of one OF
the quarters of the above period is
missing from the county clerk and re-
corder's office. In reply to the veiled
insinuation that possibly l might be
able to account for the report I will
state the report was filed with the
county auditor May 81, 1911, anG
passed by the board of county com
missioners during their session for
that quarter and filed with the county
clerk and recorder, as shown by his
records, and a warrant drawn in pay
ment of the same. The last time
saw the report was when filed the
same. Perhaps some of those who
have been SO industriously searching
my records the past few weeks might
be able to account for the missing
quarter. It could serve no purpose o1
mine, as / am only too glad to have
the records made accessible to every.
one and as in a previous statemen,
l now renew an invitation to anyone
and to the Republican in particular
to come to my office in case they de.
sire any information along this lin,
as the permanent record of this quar-
ter, as we'll as Of every quarter, dur.
Ing my term is recorded and kept ii
the records of the sheriff's office.
In review of the 20 months of m,
term all the criticism of my oppo
nent has been relative to the expens,
| Of the office and I believe I hav,
shown to fair minded people that, II
consideration of the volume of Worl
done by my office and the increase Il,
salaries and in deputies, due entirel,
to the operation of the law in chang
ing the classification Of the county
my administration has been Just a,
economical as that of any previou
sheriff. In addition to that / desir
to call the attention of the people Il
the moral side of the question an,
have them make comparison Of m.
personal record and that of my depu
ties with the record of any previou
sheriff of this or any other county Il
the state. | am not at all fearful o
the result of such a comparison. Evel
my critics cannot charge that hay
ever accepted or received any con
sideration except that which Is abso
lutely fixed by law, and the onl
charge they can MAKE is that I hav
worked too hard while in the office
The record of convictions and revenu
turned into the county treasurer from
my office is an indication that M
work must have been well done an
that l have performed my sworn duty
w. L. KELLEY.