Elmore County Republican. [volume] (Mountain Home, Idaho) 1910-1915, 1914-03-21

In last week s issue OF the Reput
l1can, appeared the Judges deciS o.
and remarks in the summary pre-
ceedings to remove F. p. AXE an,
Kittie S. Cowen, from their office
as trustees, with the statement tha
both cases would be appealed to tn,
Supreme Court. A few words ma,
lot be out of place, explaining VIII.
the cases will be appealed
The appeal is not taken In spiri
of anger but because we, who be
ileve that a School Board have M
right to persist for three years IL
not giving us report as required by
law, and who have taken every
known means to get such report be
lore beginning the last action, want
to have, 1T settled once for all wheth
er Or not a Boaid can continue ia
hold their office, and continue to de.
| fy the law. When the Supreme
Court hears and decides these cases,
that question will be settled for all
time. So much for the reason Tor
appealing.
And here We would rest the ques-
ton were it not for the fact that it
will be close to year before the
cases will be heard by the Supreme
Court-possibly over a year. The
Court Stenographer informed us taat
it would be the middle of the sum
mer, or later, before he could even
have the evidence transcribed, SO we
have decided to analyze the Judges
decision. We have no criticism to
make but we believe that an analy-
sis of the decision-a statement of
what some of the evidence shows,
and what was gained by the suit, is
the right of the taxpayers to know
and will be beneficial to them.
We are informed that whenMr. AXE
was asked how the suit was decided,
he replied, 1--WE stuck Corker for the
costs. we are of the opinion
that that is all they have to congrat-
ulate themselves on, and even that
would have been otherwise If the
statutes had allowed the Judge to
make them pay their own costs. (See
Judges opinion in last weeks issue.)
OF course they still have their Offices
but then they did not gain them,
they had them when they started in.
They gained nothing They just sim
ply did not lose them. On the
other hand, we think those citizens and
taxpayers who have stood behind and
the efforts to get the know
ledge of where our tax money was
spent, who got it, and what they got
it for, gained much, which We shall
point out from time to time, as
space and time permits.
The decision says in part: "The
law sought to be applied in this case,
as the Court construes it, is rather
4 harsh provision, and is not intend
I'd to reach officers violating the
plain provisions of the Statutes
through ignorance, and is not intended
% reach those making their best ef-
orts to comply with it, but is rather
to reach those who inten-
ionally do wrong, seeking to take
advantage of the people for their own
gain.' Not much for the Board to
De proud of in that statement. Again,
Nor do | think that Mr.. Corker Is
o be censured for asking for that
o which the people were entitled"
The Court laid great stress on the
act that graft had not been charged,
ather extravaganza, and cited the
newspaper articles of last year to
ustain that contention. He was
urely right in that contention. Ex-
ravagance is what was charged, and
making false and unintelligible re-
orts for the purpose of perpetuatng
hose extravagances. They were also
harged with shutting us out of the
.ssembly room in the school house,
nd holding the annual meeting in
he basement, In room only 28x28,
With part of it partitioned off as
tore room, a room so small that 1t
s impossible for q majority OF
hose wishing to attend to get inside,
With only three chairs, (Which We're
coupled by two members of tn,
'oard and the superintendent wife),
Or the purpose of preventing any
iscussion of the wilfully unintelhgi- s
lie statements that were given to US &
axpayers, instead Of the reports con-
emplated by the statutes. |
The Board plead the baby act,
laiming they did the very best they
new how, and the Judge seems 10