Show I 1 STORE AND TALK BACK metcalfe Met blet story receives I 1 attention NO BRIBES WERE EVER RECEIVED the councilmen say and flint fling the I 1 charres Chart ios into the teeth of ortho the mar more on the lewis case I 1 1 now como come councilmen stone and I 1 jones and give their version of sey eral oral notorious cases as follows utah july 3 1893 EDITOR editon in the tile issue of your our paper of the ad dinst ap appeared cared a communication from ex ct C city t marshal larsh and chief of police J W R kmetcalf metcalf III in n which ho lie professes to give the tile public ids 1119 reasons for hiving having recently resigned hia ilia I 1 position in that article ho sees fit to score councilman jones and myself tk quite alte freely and to cist cast serious reflections ions on oil our integrity he N w rould make us particularly lv Iv tho friends of 4 sure thing men and add bunco steer ers I 1 presume eMr mr jones is is able to take tako care of bim himself self I 1 shall confine myself to mr metcalfe Met unwarranted attack upon me inc while it is true that mr metcalf had bad a I 1 perfect right to resign legally lie has no justifiable excuse for heaping uncalled for abuse upon members of the city I 1 council and police commission b because because they might differ from himin him in some I 1 I 1 matters pertaining pertain ine to the police e force his uis statements with regard to maypart my part in in the lewis affair are arc entirely misleading ing as I 1 shall presently show as also bis further statement that patrolmen were being removed for no 0 other ter cause than that they stood out against wrong doing let me say right here that I 1 have entertained only friendly fee feelings lingi for mr metcalf while dif dinen ferig tg i from him in ili some matters it is now clear to me that the real offense and 1 affront which lias has so deeply wounded f mr metcalf lies in ili the removal of his particular pet air mr sleeth in ill order to understand metcalfe Met feelings in in this matter it will bo be well to state that he lie r lias bas a very sensitive spot when any recommendation I 1 ommen dation is is made without his entire consent and approval it is is true that I 1 opposed the matter of sending I 1 sir mr sleeth or any man to chicago at the tile expense I 1 consider that in in these hard times we have enough to doto do to keep up a force at home mr metcalf complains bitterly that he lie W was as not always consulted in in the question of reducing the force that the mayor was not riot consulted ili in regard to t the action ion taken in in the c cise ase of learn I 1 that is 13 not riot true the tile mayor was consulted on this matter wd and agreed with us but why have a police commission at all it mr metcalf a wishes only were to bo be consulted why hy not constitute the chief of police the tho sole advisor of I 1 I 1 the mayor or gire give him power to appoint men irien to positions on the force and drop them at pleasure did he be and th the 0 mayor consult the police co commission I 1 in sending mr sleeth to the worlds I 1 r fair air at tile exp expense ense of the taxpayers of ogdan no I 1 the first the tire commission I 1 knew of the worlds fair policeman m n was that sleeth had been appointed po in ted to go and the tile council was asked ed to fix ins ilia salary I 1 opposed paying him anything any thine forty dollars per month was proposed it was finally agreed to by tile majority of the tile court council ell i I 1 the tile mayor vetoed th the 0 pro proposition posit of 40 claiming that sleeth could draw his salary of per in month O 0 n tl I 1 sleeth went to chicago ter the ile council refused to pay him repeatedly and finally declared I 1 CUM hia his position v vacant this seems I 1 to have exasperated mr metcalf and he lie evidently concluded that rather than be ignored lie would step down and out I 1 presume I 1 incurred mr metcalf a displeasure when I 1 introduced the resolution I 1 that permanent re residents and taxpayers those who bad property interests teres tsin in ogden only should be s selected e for appointive officers tins this would affect some of mr metcalfe Met blet I 1 favorite men 1 now for the lewis matter mr metcalf I 1 intimates strongly that I 1 was accepting cc T ting bribes from lewis for tr arv in ing to lidd hold the police off from interfering with w ith i his business this is and places mr metcalf in a very unenviable r light after remarking that lewis stated that lie bad jones and stone if fixed he lie finally admits that lewis denied having baving said it before the commission As to what LOW lewis may a Is have 1 0 said to metcalf private abely lyl in or order c r to square himself with ahn marshal marsh al it is 13 very evident that mr lewis knew e I 1 that as the police get their orders fr from 0 I 1 ilia marshal if he lie could fix tire marshal ho lie v would have no need to fix I 1 anybody else 1 and it is is unreasonable 6 to suppose that lewis could ial fix X tire marshal at per month and fix jones and stone likewise or eay say 1 1200 per month it is is fair to pre awe cumo teat that lewis would not hesitate to approach a man whom he lie thought ho might I 1 1 square aare from what I 1 have learned ot tile man I 1 since ho lie app appeared eared before the tile commission I 1 think it very likely I 1 knew but little about the man mail I 1 at that time lie ile had never approach d me with v illi any kind of a proposition as to permission to run ins his business if ii lie so stated to metcalf he lie simply did I 1 it t to keep his cause with the marshal roars lial lewis statement to me was that lio lie I 1 already had taken out a regular license to run an auction jewelry business but it that tint the tile police were interfering with his bis business that a certain policeman made it ins his business to stand in ili fro front I 1 it of pf bis his door and warn w am people not to enter F or dr they would be robbed that this I 1 policeman ol iceman had it in in for him because r iio 0 O would not put up lie demanded 1 a hearing before the police commission P ibold I 1 told ho ile was a citizen and a it taxpayer r alim that mat it if lio lie had a license to do bu business el he lie ought not to be interfered wi with t ii so long as he did a legitimate business but kit t hat it il he dealt in in crooked I 1 work lio ho roust must expect to interfered with that I 1 lo 10 a could do him no good he ile replied that found te bo be breaking the law if lio ID waa as it ho was willing ling to take I 1 I 1 noi notified 1 him m to appear before the therom commission inie eion and there make ilia his statements I 1 did not run after I 1 him as stated by realf lie was on hand and waiting I 1 I 1 in recorders office on tile night re rc inferred M red to 0 by mr MI r metcalf blet calf expecting to went out to called I 1 resent wen t fr find mr jonea who had ex used sed him r aalf for a few minutes at train time on I 1 business connected with hie ilia ticket I 1 office mr I 1 ewis made a statement before tile lio clorin commission Gissi oll of his hi complaints that lie had a larca stock block of goads goods on hand and could not dispose I 1 of them while in m tf Nl will As agreed ile bad 1 that been lie it should sa wa unanimously lo 10 three weeks to cloeo close out hie his auction stock I 1 he run a legitimate provided L business but that if he lie engaged in it should be stopped I 1 crooked rork lie that jones at ld I 1 insisted that as then in riot fair to stand a p patrolman it was and warn of tile door continually mefi front to enter it ila was to do a not fi people business MW VU t that it b a did I 1 to bo crooked work lie was marshal or any believe that the not aid eho bad A rig fit to run out af town ftc 3 and citizen aels was fl 1 d gu 1 ity of I 1 b akin g tio la at as lie had ilia rights u ll 11 der the law I 1 resent the insinuation that I 1 was being 81 bridd by Is lewis it is as false as it is unworthy the ma n who uttered u it I 1 defy metcalf or steve all by policeman or 1 any citizen to s 0 I 1 have over been guilty of ace accepting opting any any bribe from any per son in any ta shape or form I 1 be bev 1 eve that my record in III this city as a taxpayer and citizen issach is such tha tho the insinuation need not bo be noticed save tor the tile tact fact that those who did not know me might night believe there could be something in it mr statement to mr learn as to how bi his checks heeks must blush at tol such tho tile thought though ot such a man as stone being a member of the police commission was certainly a painful reflection for him and when he further remembered that I 1 was as I 1 am on his metcalfe Met official ial bonds for 2000 the tile thought must have become well nigh unbearable I 1 am heartily in favor of suppressing stich unlawful persons person sas as sure tiling j men and bunco steer ers I 1 have boys who will soon benyoung be young men I 1 know how easy it is for inexperienced der persona sons to fall a prey to such operations but u I 1 am not in favor 0 going outside of regular and lawful methods now I 1 C come ome to the statement about mr gill being surprised and his signature obtained unawares to the tile recommendation to remove officer learn it will bo be apparent how unreliable mr met blet statements are when it is noted that mr gill was the first to sign the document and I 1 the last while I 1 know mr gill biad the matter under consideration for one or two days as I 1 did mr Gillis gill is certain certainly lyof of age and know what ho lie was doing A 1 I july 3 1893 to THE PUBLIC replying to ex mar metcalfe Met calfa letter of july 1 wherein ho lie poses as a great reformer and martyr by resurrecting resurrect ins tire dead I 1 will say that the alleged facts of the major part of his letter originated in his fertile brain shortly after taking our in bisted very forcibly that policeman sullivan should be removed as I 1 understood or originally i because sullivan did not support ort metcalf at the tile last election sullivan sulivan being retained by a majority vote of the commission consisting of stone and myself this seemed to anger metcalf so far as the statement made in the letter t t e r C charging that I 1 had given lewis permission r 1 ion to conduct his business I 1 have a e to say the whole matter is untrue I 1 never at any time either by myself or in it connection with council man nian stone gave lewis permission to run his business and I 1 never at any time favored his business or methode methods it is true there was a meeting of the police commission with lewis at the ti time e stated in ts letter and that tn lewis e was given three weeks to close up hia ilia business that permission was s simply y to 0 close out his ilia stock istock of goods and was I 1 in n nowise a permission to carry on gambling or bunco steering I 1 heard at one time that lewis was making statements upon the streets that he lie had fixed the police commission and meeting him in the presence of james JamesP F render on twenty fifth street cal called led his ilia attention to these statements and asked him why he lie made them knowing they were untrue he lie stated in in reply most emphatically that lie ba had made no such statements I 1 further say that I 1 never was determined that the police should be called off to paying attention to lewiss business I 1 never suggested to the chief of police the calling off of his ilia men from lewis or any other bunco with reference to mayor lundy and metcalf not being cognizant or recommending the tile removal of learn I 1 will say that maycie lundy with stone and myself in the presence of councilman beggs agreed that tile police force should be reduced three men and that leam learn bo be dropped immediately GEO GEOW W JONES |