Show IN UX TAX LIST CAGE GASE Lly Attorney Lyon and Law Laws Lawyers lawyers Stewart and Booth Before Be Before Before i fore Judge Armstrong LIGHTS liGHTS OF BOARD INVOLVED r Said to 10 o n i It to I 0 Illegally PId to 10 Ii Men lure mountain Monday listened to toor Armstrong 3 Judg Siu or of copal in the tuo action f County aunt Attorney Attorn Job P I 1 Ito by v ht r from tho the county com corn Ton to 10 r r bondsmen and id their phoner r X Mr been illegally pall paid to to for tor till n titan leI 0 n O of f the lilt h tax Ht of ot x f fur for r the tho year 1906 1905 The Tha Thaon Thes tak I uk the demurrer r of at th the was 88 on tnt s fUn to the a an anIer anter attorney County the of ter Ier appearing In behalf ot or orI I n Lyon L In A I and rd J Stewart the In behalf r and an It IL L t j appearing tf f Ua which eh the court me the demurrer demurer to 10 I eked td art II ot of nn d w for the printing p pero ero IId were for by the com ox to 1 a aw r n by law that no notT for tor the Publication tT t von IS tine the county count Iha noti nolle n ih the directed to II advertise 1 for tor no not nol ter m WM Rae printing lh lI t RII required Mi pill for far or V VAnd tN claim n for fr nr the printing With And in n that Irb b ibs lh t h na M naw MI w elit nt pj r Ides w the I salute p pr that the con cone conr y sit 11 U L Ln n nl tim the tax Hut IUt hud had not I r e i tar for printing been t aar ardo l d m III tt the lowest lt bl A e Invalid the intent or of the tho vu If each ad requiring lon n or of the I P taw law I mv frt nn Win to tho the bad s and impo and ex extortion In the M err r of ot IDa county notices by b Kt bid from different In the I ten M III h r maintained that a ty bit l J paid of l founty Y Yr t L considered in t v same eam light h as ft a 6 ethe r 1 run M a the powers powe e eh they tir t are only those thos delegated In 10 them tarn bv by b tho the and tho the bids bide for far tnt tut th the 0 a t of ot awarding printing Minting the tax tIU lIt Hat wore were without the of ot law it wee was 01 done to the law requiring adver commie i nt for tor bid b die The rho loners in tee or rely only the agents of or the county mr urI l 1 Tont and those thone tho who vho con with frith them must mint do po ro with the theof of ot the limitation of ot their puree r cited cases Me bearing on the point print it at t Issue from Ohio Indiana and courts courtl showing that where Mi bids were M re not railed rafted for tot on public ie oak k or for tor furnishing to the th the contracts l were ere not legal and could not be ratified by the com coin ai M a county count liability gro Se Scottie grotto SeI tto I SJ of the Compiled Laws of oC oCt t W TOS sae quoted which tate tat lUt ill an 11 contracts not made under the n of ot the statute requiring ad t for tor public nolle etc vile orl ri Ib void and without au of cf law fa 11 FOR rolt THE Tim ERS Attorney Stewart for tor the closer laId cold the had cried ta la pod good faith In securing a It bid rom rant the tb Intermountain republican fi f for r plating the tax list and the lily huh hid received the Ule of ot tin rho having I a thereby tees bola enabled tl I d I to collect the whole mount of ot the Ui delinquent tax list so an and that the question o oth of or ita th o of the proceeding proc could coup tot sot 10 now noir be raised lie Ile contended the had authority to make noil rJOO a contract In fact tAct the commit revere i nn ra u ar charged with the of such contracts by statute ml Mt h he that the case ca cUM clued br be It the th county attorney were Yere not net liP ap lc t to 10 the rue rape In point from the theart fir art rt that they ther th did not raise else the point i 0 authority The California case cited Ir IT the counsel Mr Stewart Wended taid I Id that the county com corn could rould at subsequent pee ses ell runt mn corr correct ct any Rny Irregularity that had tt at t ant an previous In inand Kf lard and rt to inch contracts and he hll main that the In this Ihla we cue had ratified the contract for tor printing the tax Hots Sete us ca contemplated by b law I Mr Lir Stewart claimed that county commissioners art are of ot officers and must excrete their In regent to all nil I Ing to the welfare and banedt of 0 the county and ns ca R such they th are exempt from censure In url the mme as sa n Judge Is III exempt mi as they thy are suppo supposed lI ed tu to t m art ad artin t tIn In III good f si Hi lie He wild Mild the In this 8 nail bed acted In good faith und end th the ull of lh th the ad advertisement advertisement 1 that the they lId did H t tIn In good Rood faith and the count county gut the and the th of 0 the th rom om therefore lIld not lw be I If It this thin were not act tut said Mil Mr Ir Hi Stew Stewart w wart art nu no urner r would ever aver be bo safe linCe and tnt no man could be n found who would set Ilet nu as a Il county com m If It these m then n am art to be b per l fOr r pon lly liable ae n liiK COU I de mende fIll every ever little tittle mistake In pro roo which occurs occur In iu I titer their capacity such curb a position would noted break brenk even the most moat solvent business man and no nun onn could bo Wi round found who would accept such mch an Attorney Attorn If H K E 1 Iod wl for the commissioners with IU n II brief contending that the th statements node nm ln In tho lie answer had not been beau and that the commis commissioners Nonee had asked for tor and lord hat received r d ii u bid bill from Crom the Ih Republican Re Itt Republican publican that the tho work hud had been bean done dOM the tho th contract ct had been ratified and tho the county had received the bene benefits fits of or to u County Count Lyon In l losing liiK for forthe ro rothe forthe the prosecution ullon Hold Bald If It the till i of or tho the defense bo true Iru then the th i mount could for e in i n the matter of ot constructing con u Ii bridge across a In the round go If 0 to toone I Iono toone one ono contractor and u ask k him to submit a n bid and let It the contract for the time bridge to him without further adver edver advertising taing He lie claimed that this thle was nut not tho rho spirit of or tho law which provided that bids should be he taken so po that all aU Interested might make mako tenders for tor any public pUblio work and und In thin manner mammer pro protect protest tNt test the county count against extortion At the conclusion conclusion of oC the tha th arguments the cane coxe was a submitted and n a de Ie decision decision cl lon will bo lio announced by b Judge Armstrong later |