Show THE JOINT BUILDING WE present in this issue some facts connected with the proposed and long delayed joint city and county building rho fhe f liberal procrastination connected with that needed improvement has caused a good deal of exasperation among members of the party in power in this city as well as among people not belonging to it A question has been raised regarding the competency of the architect with whom the eon contract tract was made for plans specifications and of construction as will be seen by the documents which appear elsewhere in the NEWS it to is appropriate now to examine from the evidence presented the status of the discussion mr work was referred to mr hale another architect of this city the latter severely critt alsed the drawings and specifications mr apponyi was given a hearing before the joint committee and he disposed of mr hale whose objections to the work submitted to him for inspection were overturned it does not require any stretch of conjecture to infer that had mr hale floored mr apponyi before the committee as completely as he had app appeared ered to do it on paper the committee or a majority of them would have been satisfied to go no further seeing that the boot was on the other foot someone else must be found whose criticisms could by some means be made to stick hence the reference of mr ap work to mr charles E j illsley Ill 1119 Bley ley it will be seen by the report of the gentleman last named that he be also assumes to demolish mr Appo nyls plans and specifications this causes the salt lake tribune which has been the inveterate and malicious enemy of the architect who secured the contract from the beginning to chuckle it will be observed however that it cackles over a one aided story mr Ill report is ex parte perhaps if mr apponyi gets a chance at it he will serve it in the same way he did the criticisms of mr hale haig we believe with solomon that he be who judg et eab b a matter before he heareth it to is a fool to base a judgment on a hearing bearing of one side of a question is absurd as well as wicked because in ninety nine instances ott oat of a hundred it will wih be colored by the relator the coloring process is certainly tinly apt to be applied if there be a motive present for its use it appears from the document itself supplied by mr illsley that he to is an interested party it is evident that he anticipates in the event of mr apponyi being rejected that he himself will be awarded the contract who that wishes to do justice would base a re ejection action of a contract upon a report of a competitor for it we do not pretend to be able to judge of the competency of mr Appon work but we have hae some very decided ideas about justice hence we say that there can be no excuse for attempting to repudiate that gent lemans labors or render the contract made with him nugatory on oa the mere basis of an ex patte statement from an interested person it is to be presumed that the previous city council and county committee who accepted mr ap Is work and the liberal officers who later entered into the contract with him did not assume their positions in the dark As intelligent tell igent agents of the people they doubtless considered well the steps involved before taking them it to is well known however that mr apponyi incurred the bitter hatred of the I 1 gang and the rabid wing wi 09 of the liberal party because he expressed himself to the effect that he considered the hoisting of the carpetbag carpet bag the insignia of the party over the stars and stripes to be an indignity to the national flag for this he has haa been abused and cursed and an idea is prevalent that the war waged against him la Is more on that ground than that of incompetency as an architect if he is really incompetent he ought not to be entrusted with the important work involved but there is fade evidence that he be is not being fairly treated ex parte statements from interested parties are not proof he has disposed of one set of criticisms of that character he should be given a chance at the other ether |