Iron County record. [volume] (Cedar City, Utah) 1893-1982, 1917-11-23
COUNTY CLERK
STATES HIS CASE
by Artful Manipulation of Facts He
Seeks to Create False Impression
in the Minds of Public.

u
so much locally, in the last few years,
of useless and futile newspaper jang-
| ling, that we are loath to be dragged
into one ourselves, but in justice to
our present Board of County Commits
sioners, and incidentally to myself as
Clerk of the Board, we feel that an
answer to the editorial in last weeks
issue of the Iron County Record, en-
titled Shabby Treatment" is una
voidably necessary. The article re-
ferred to gave out the impression, in
language not the most becoming, that
the Board of County Commissioners
and the Clerk had Disseminated n
gainst The Record and in favor of
the other paper published in the
county; that they had comittcd an
objectionable sin against the papers
concerned and the public generally in
calling for bids from those papers for
the performance of certain County
work, and that because the bids from
the other county paper were invar-
iably lower than those Of the Record,
the manager of that paper is a scab
and n crook to the extent that the
county is being feeced by him in
cases where bids have not been called
for.
In our reply to that article, we
should like it distinctly understood
that we are not here to champion the
cause of either paper, but that the
public may know the facts in the case
as shown by the records Of the Board
of County Commissioners, we can not
avoid making some comparisons, and
trust they will be taken for what they
are worth. A careful examination of
the claims allowed by the Board of
County Commissioners in the last two
years, or since the establishment of
the paper at Parowan, reveals that
the complaint if there is any, should
come from the other paper, rather
than from The Record for the reason
that during that time The Record has
received S433.16 while the other pa
per has received only $213.45, or $6.26
less than half as much. A further
examination of the County Records
reveals that in every instance where
bids have been called for, those from
the other paper have been materially
lower, and in cases that afford an OPP
portunity to compare the prices
charged by the two papers where
bids have not been called for the ten
dency has been in the same direction.
A few illustrations may be of value
in proving this statement The first
case on record where bids were called
for, the Iron County Record bid l5c.
and the other paper 9l2c. per name
and description for publishing the de
linquent tax list for 1915, difference
Of 5Ec. More recent Illustrations are
found in the bids of $41.00 from The
Record and 5000 from the other pa
per for printing the 1917 assessment
notices, also bids of $4,000 from The
Record and $32.55 from the other pa
per for printing the 1917 tax notices,
difference Of practically $1,000 on
$4,000 jobs in each instance, and
again practically the same difference
exists in the bids of 15c. from The
Record and 111ac. from the other pa
per for publishing the 1917 delinquent
taX-list. A typical illustration of
charges by the respective papers in
cases where bids have not been called
for is afforded in the printing of the
1916 assessment notices by The Rec
ord for $500, and the printing of an
equal number of 1916 tax notices. a
considerably bigger job because of the
stub attached, by the other paper for
S295O, and other instances of the
same character are not lacking.
The matter Of publishing County
ordinances, sneeringly referred to in
the editorial mentioned, is The Rec
ord's own proposition, MS the editor
himself met with the Board and Of
fered to publish all ordinances at
half price or 2i4c, per line instead Of
the regular rate Of &c, provided the
other paper would do the same, and
when the proposition was submitted
to the editor Of the other paper, he
said sure he would be glad to publish
them for 2l2 per line as he had only
been charging the county &c. a line
for that work.
So interesting is the story connected
with the publication of the Delinquent
Tax List since the establishment of
the paper at Parowan that it might
not be amiss to relate it briefly As
we have already stated, in 1915 The
Record bid l5c per name and descrip-
ton and the other paper 9Ac. for
publishing the list, and after carefully
considering the matter, and in view
of the fact that the other paper was
not so we'll established, and did not
have 81 paparol a cirucIof;n, IL