the deed held in escrow, without any public record being made. Admitting this statement to be true. It relieves the Ogden Waterworks company of the charge of any Irregular Irregu-lar conduct In the course of the transfer, trans-fer, but It places the agents of the Clty the city administration In a most unfavorable light and brings up the greater question as to how many similar concealments are yet to bo exposed. Had a local real estate agent, acting for another, been guilty of concealing the real facta In a transfer of property, as In the case of the city administration administra-tion acting for Ogden City, would ho have been liable to criminal action? ASKED TO EX.-LAIN. a taxpayer requests us to explain the Gill land transfer which has stirred stir-red the whole community and brought the severest censure upon the city administration. ad-ministration. The Gill land tract, comprising 320 acres, is located at the mouth of Taylor Tay-lor canyon. At the time of the bond election for the purchase of the waterworks, thero was a warranty deed on record In the county recorder's office, showing the land to be owned by the Waterworks company. Immediately after the election, ft was whispered around that tho Gill land had been transferred back to the Gills, but there was nothing of record to prove the rumor true. On February 15 last the city council coun-cil startled the people by authorizing the payment of $1,3S4.10 for this same piece of land. When requested to explain, the city administration, through the city attorney, attor-ney, went into a long declaration, two-thirds two-thirds of which was a personal tirade, In which tho city attorney admitted admit-ted the facts as stated above, but said the Gill property had been deeded back to the Gills by the waterworks and