The twice-a-week Twin Falls times. (Twin Falls, Idaho) 1916-1918, 1917-09-18


organization were to be paid by the
members thereof. The secretary and
stenographer of the new society we're
the same as those of the old and the
same room, lights and telephone we're
used by both. This organization was
formed August 10. This plan when
proposed, seemed TO solve the prob
lem, but new casus belli or what
was taken to be one had appeared in
the meantime. The president of the
farm bureau had charged that State
Leader HOchbaum, the state officers
and 1.-The politicians" were controlled
by the sugar trust and were trying to
destroy the movement as an effective
force. These charges are familiar to
the readers of the TIMES, as they
were given the widest publicity, as q
matter of news, through it's columns
At the same time the question of
the exact place in the management
of things which Ohe new county agent
Donald Mclean, should occupy, arOus
ed a warm discussion. The county
agent seems to have taken the posi-
ton that he was at least legally the
head of the county farm bureau man
agement, an assumption which man
ayers of bureau were unwilling to con-
]
/ " on account of the differences of
opinion regarding the seat of author
! ity and the reflection cast on the in
/ tegrity of intention of the state lead
er, the latter removed the county
agent from the office of the county
farm bureau, without formal consul
tatiOn with its directors as board,
and placed him back in the office of
the United States Bureau of Animal
Industry, in the court house, from
which place the former county agent,
w. n. Birch had been taken some
months previously. In the meantime,
it was also minated that the county
commissioners, particularly Chairman
Carlson, whom they charge with being
! the whole works, were opposing the
bureau.
The reader of this synopsis will see
that the foundation of a beautiful mis-
understanding had been symetrically
laid. In this article we are concerned
with the development of the trouble
and not with the truth or falsity of
the charges made, so we state the
charges and limitations without COM
ment. The question of segregating |
what was farm bureau work, strictly |
speaking, from what was more or less !
work of the new organization, the |
farm bureau auxiliary, was bound to
become more difficult to answer when |
suspicion and dislike replaced cordial |
relations on both sides, assuming both
to be absolutely honest.
The first thing that came to trouble
the waters was not a healing angel |
from above, but an imp in the form of
statutory Interpretation. What did
the law intend? All will concede that
the commissioners have no more legal
power, and therefore no more equit-
able power, to appropriate public
money unless granted authority by
statute, than the editor of the TIMES
has, or than the we'll known character
John Doe has. This will, of course,
not be disputed.
The brief state law published in
full in the TIMES of September 3 and |
republished September II. was enact
ed under the caption, authorizing
Boards of County Commissioners to
Appropriate Funds for County Dem
onstration Work and Home EcOnom-
les" The commissioners appealed to
the attorney general for an opinion
and in the temporary absence on
business of Attorney General Walters
an opinion was handed down by AS
sistant Attorney General Pope. I'm
fortunately, it seems to us, the office
of the attorney general did not touch
the real point at issue, so that the
opinion needed further construction to
make it fit the issue here. The county
commissioners, convinced that the
county agent was the legal head of
the farm bureau organization, insisted
that his endorsement be obtained by
those presenting farm bureau bills,
before paying such bills. President
White of the farm bureau refused to
ask the county agent to sign them, de-
claring that the board should stand
on the plan outlined by State Agent
Hochbaum at the time of his CONVEX
sation with Deputy County Auditor
Finney. Although Mr.. Finney stated
that the agreement was not carried
out in all particulars by the bureau,
he did not personally oppose the pay
meHt of the bills on the 0. X of the
farm bureau officers. This brought on
a deadlock which still prevails. There
is but one exception to this statement.
A friend of Miss Melcher, the stenog-
rapher hired by the farm bureau,
brought her bill to the county agent |
and asked him to look it over, which
he did and endorsed its payment for
$4,000, over half the total amount of |
SIS, which was allowed.
This impels us to make a practical |
suggestion. Since the county board |
has determined that the suggestions |
made in the HOchbaum letter were |
without legal force and were merely
directory and that the county agent is
the person who should be held re- I
spOnsible for the endorsement of the |
bills, it is quite natural for them to |
insist that his endorsement should |
precede payment unless convinced that
he has unreasOnably refused to sign |
legitimate claims, in which case they
would, naturally, proceed independ-
entity to pay them. Technically, they
are probably right in insisting that
the bills be endorsed according to law
before being presented to the board
at any rate such is the ordinary Gus