The Winslow mail., 1916-03-17
Published every Friday. Sub
cription, $500 per year.
Friday, March II, 1916.
Covering Tracks.

slipping through a demand for
$1,000 for Judge Sapp's library,
as they had hoped to get by
without attracting any notice to
the deal, but the publicity they
received prompted them at the
February meeting to amend the
January minutes, and evidently
with the aid and assistance of
county attorney or some equally
brilliant mind, they add this gem
of legal erudition as a defense
of they illegal acts. which we are
pleased to reproduce in sections
for comment:
This board having heretofore included in esti-
mates of funds for 1916 the sum of $500 for a
county law library. and this sum being included
in tax levy for 1916. and there having been no
objection made to said estimate and levy
Does such a statement legalize
an illegal tax levy. Had the levy
been made to buy an automobile,
would any sensible man believe
such twaddle would make the
act legal. The statutes clearly
define what items shall be in
cluded in a tax budget, and the
supervisors have strictly admin
istrative power and not legisla-
tive functions. Proceeding
And the board having authority under the stat
utes to purchase law books.
There is a plain, explicit pro-
vision in the statutes that Is per
cent of the costs in civil cases
shall be set aside for the pur-
chase of a law library, and there
is no other authority granted. a
fact that ought to be well-known
to the legal light who drafted
those lines, and the cunning sub
tlety of the statement is plainly
apparent. That we are right we
have the authority of nearly ev-
cry district judge in Arizona.
This deal was put through with
out any consideration of the in
terests of the people, but solely
on the solicitation of Judge Sapp,
who stultified himself by trans
crossing the laws he took a SOL
emn oath to uphold and defend.
Proceeding again,
And there not being anything to be gained by
advertising for bids as book companies have uni
form prices on law books.
Here we have another speci-
men of jesuitical logic to bolster
UP rotten deal. Law publish
ing houses have uniform prices
on books, but does ybody with
any honesty in their makeup be-
lieVe that. dealers in second-han
law books have uniform prices?
Then why was that statement
Incorporated if not for the single
purpose of deception. Let us
explain. The law says when the
supervisors have to make an ex-
penditure exceeding S100 they
must advertise for bids, and the
statement was made as an ex-
cuse for violating the law.
Who is the directing force be-
hind the supervisors, what infu-
ence do they bring to bear, that
the supervisors can be coerced
to violate their oath of office, and
place themselves and their sure
ties personally liable for their
illegal acts? Every statute that
stood in the way of buying and
paying for Judge Sapp's library
has been ruthlessly brushed to
one, side. Look at the different
sections of the statutes that have
been wantonIy violated to put
over the deal: they unlawfully
made a $1,000 levy; they violate
the law that SAYS they must ad-
vertise for bids when making ex.
penditures exceeding $100; they
violate the law that says only
Is per cent of the court costs
shall be expended for law books;
and they violate the law that
in direct terms says no claim or
demand shall be approved or al