Fergus County Democrat., 1914-05-12
.EXCESS.SALARY
WAS OVERSIGHT
Continued from page one.)

did not reduce the salary to SIPS per
month. Mr.. Marshall opined that it
did not, and taking up the session laws
lying on the table proceeded to read
the amendment through. Then he dis
covered the change for the first time
So far as relates to this matter there
was no acrimonious discussion" no
dispute, no controversy, no spirit of
! retaliation" Mr. Marshall Immediate
ly and voluntarily stated that he would
see that the amount of $25 per month
| that had been paid In excess Of the
statutory limitation was refunded to
the county. This was satisfactory to
the commissioners and with the un,
derstanding the incident closed and
the next item of business was taken
/ up.
Prior to the publication of the pur-
posely garbled and misleading story
in the last issue of the Argus, the ex.
cess was refunded. There was never
word Of heated argument" in re-
gard to this matter at any time. It
was an inadvertance, as is clearly
shown by the fact that the state ex-
aminer as well as the other officials
charge were mistaken as we'll as the
county attorney. The county is not
out one cent because of 1t and 1t is
really without significance.
Another Instance.
In fact, there Is no more Significance
In this than there was in the instance
a few years ago when the council Of
the city of LewistOwn, realizing hat
the salary Of the mayor, $25, was so
small as to be joke if measured with
the services he performed, decided to
raise 1t to $50 month. The head of
the city government was naturally
gratlfied, not so much, perhaps, over
the $25 month increase as the recog-
milton that this increase implied. All
went on swimmingly until finally the
discovery was made that the limit of
the mayors salary In city Of this
class was $25 month. When this
was ascertained, the mayor, Of course,
refunded to the city the excess of $25
month that he had drawn and there
was no hurrah over 1t.
Further Back. ...
Back in 1897, the Republican sheriff
of Fergus county, man of strict hon
esty and who made good record,
charged the county for the board of
prisoners at rate in excess of the
statutory amount He did not intend
to pad the payroll" nor defraud any.
body. The Republican board of county
commissioners at that time allowed
the charge and 1t was paid. Subse-
quently 1t was found to be in excess
of the legal charge and as soon as 1t
was brought to the sheriff's attention
he refunded the excess and no one
ever dreamed that he was endeavoring
to "padD' any payroll,
The motive back of the Argus effort
to magnify this matter is shown at the
end OF it's misleading article, in which
1t practically says that it's object Is to
get the Progressives to get together
with the Republicans in supporting a
county ticket, quoting from its old
standby, the lawyer" In support of
its plea.
Misquotes Allen.
The organ wilfully misquoted Com.
missioner Charles D. Allen in refer.
ence to the subject. The "interview''
was simply a telephone call to Mr.
Allen, who stated that the whole Incl.
dent was settled and disposed of. BY
working in its own questions as to suit
being brought and SO on, the organ
completely misrepresented the commits
sioner.