| Show AS TO COUNTY WARRANTS SALT LAKE ciry jtb february 18 1898 your recent editorial in relation to boune bill 64 having for its ice object the validating of county warrants seems to us to be somewhat unjust under toe circumstances we trust you will in this matter thoroughly anu believe that upon a thorough investigation you will concede that the grounds taken by you under the exist ing circumstances are hardly applicable aud and certainly not dot permit us to call your attention to t the fact that warrants issued by suit salt lake county circulated and passed tote community in perfect good food faith the question as aa to whether or not the county had bad exceeded its debt limit was waa not considered at t the time these warrants were lesu edland sold a doubtful question the must most eminent lawyers of this city were of at the opinion that the reasonable aud and lair jair construe ion of the var tar ous OUR provisions authorized the county cloctt to issue all the warrants they did afterwards in the case brought by mr fenton the question was raised in the court of the territory anu and that bat ourt emet after experiencing great difficulties to in arriving at its woo finally determined that the debt limit had been exceeded until that decision there had bad been no judicial ial determination of the question and while voile since that decision there would be no excuse on the part of the county court or purchasers of county warrants for or complaining when you look at the situation as it existed prior to lo that decision you will realize that all concerned acted in perfectly good faith the purchasers ol of those warrants had no ju linial deter initiation nation ni to guide them the opinions of lawyers supported the validity of the warrants and it does seem that under such circumstances the reason ing applied in your editorial should be so modified as not to In upon the uncertainties that existed prior to the decision but should be limited to all time rime subsequent to the he decision in the fenton case when for the first time the be statutes were construed construe 1 countzler Count ler should not be encouraged to exceed the J bt limit with the hope bope or expectation that legislatures would validate their acts act but such a rule should oot not oe applied until it was definitely determined term ter toed what constituted the be debt limit after that decision we thorough iy ay agree with every word in your ediE editorial orial upon that subject for every person who desires to pur anase warrants war ranta can then intelligently ascertain whether they are or are not in excess of the debt limit but prior to that decision as already stated there was wais no reliable means mean afforded that would be sure to guide the purchaser ut nf warrants as to whether they were or were not in excess of the debt limit particularly so as the statutes were somewhat lome what vague and uncertain and susceptible in perfect good faith of two construction sonto of wha which ch would have made all the warrants valid aud the other which was the one adapted by our supreme court which fixed the hobt limit below the ammu amount dt of war rants which had bad been issued then again you must remember that at the present time there is ia no telling w hat the decision of the courts may be as aa to lo which ot of the warrants war ranta now outstanding are and which are not legal the case commenced oommen ced a few months ago by stephen hays haya in ID the district court will fully explain and show how me ane difficulties that are yet to toe be doter determined ter mined it will cause endless idless el litigation as aa to priorities among all the war raint braot holders it will require the determination of just what contracts were outstanding when aben the debt limit was wae reached and whether or I 1 not warrants issued in payment of such contracts are not the warrants that are within the limit and will require a thorough accounting and adjudication between all the warrant holders of this county it cannot be that under suc buo a state of facts you would advise and encourage the repudiation of warrants war ranta upon the ground that they had beer been issued in excess of the he limit when that limit had pot not been judicially determined when the law fixing the limit was obscure ani and uncertain and equally of construction which would uphold the validity of warrants war rante and alen all warrants were bought in this community by persons actinic acting io in perfect good faith and when if not mot legalized endless litigation must and will follow it joes does seem to us ua that when as in the bill proposed toe the right to contest the validity of any warrant on any other grund ground except thatis that it was issued in excess of toe the limit to is entirely fair and just to the county we trust you will reconsider this matter and will investigate it thoroughly and will see aee your way clearen clear in this thia instance to withdraw the lions you have stated to the bill and we rejoin join you to in voicing those objections sis s to every warrant that has been issued since the ju lecial determination of toe the limit by our supreme court yours respectfully SEVERAL TAX PAYERS |
