Show misstatements made in county seat campaign since the action commenced early last spring to move the county seat there has haa been a veritable flood of misstatements statements made some of them may have been unintentional but for the most part they have emina geminated ted from one source and with dell deliberate bera berate til iii tent to deceive tho the public into supporting the movement no bonds or increased taxes they say probably the most fallacious ot of these has been that the move can bo be made without increasing taxation or bonded bondad indebtedness the prime object ot of removal Is that a magnati cent city and county building may bo be erected in cellar cedar city cily and yet they ask taxpayers to believe that ro bonds will be necessary and no tax increase for the sake ot of making the argument look feasible the big twenty and that title typifies the class which has negligible neg tax burdens proposes to house the county government in ili the relief relict hall and no doubt that thai same group would willingly squander fifteen or twenty thousand dollars of the taxpayer pt money to remodel a condemned building in an all effort to make it lu bt bitable only until a new building could be erected they know that it they can call get the rest ot of the county to help them move the county seat scat then they can ignore the taxpayers outside ot of cedar city slid and put over it a bond election tor for as huge a sum as they choose to spend tor for new court house which they visualize it requires only a majority ot of tho the taxpayers you know to bond their own estimates tor for a heating plant tor for this proposed temporary home for county government la Is and its a sate safe bet that those figures given out at this time are for far lower than the actual cost will be then there are vaults to build remodeling to be done the grounds to be parked the expense of 0 moving higher costs tor for maintenance etc and yet they ask gullible taxpayers to believe chait can be done without increasing taxes and that they will not issue bonds to build a new court house to make this scheme ot of renting sound feasible they propose to have the school district and the state road hoad office pay about halt half the cost but do they give you any assurance that these agencies will agree to such an arrangement they do not As a matter of fact the chances are ten toone to one that neither would consent to it but the argument sounds like a vote getter and the aill important thing now after the election it the plan workable then the taxes can be raised to pay the he rent it will be too late tor for taxpayers to protest then the big twenty has all this figured out it taxpayers tall fall for it they must not complain when taxes are raised utilities will build new court house they say an argument which was used to get signers to lo the petition tor for removal was that hat the public utilities railroad mining companies etc pay 66 55 per cent of 0 the taxes taxed of the county the purpose was to convey the impression that these utilities would pay largely tor for the magnati cent now new city and county building it has since been stated that the utilities would build this building or that it could be done from ataxia on oil our increased valuations the facts are that the utilities continued to back page continued from first page pay pax around 32 per cent of 0 the taxes less lesa than enough to take care of the ji present resent bond interest and sinking funds which amount to about 34 per cent ot of the taxes we collect and our valuations shrank about 5 6 per cent or around last year instead of increasing to build the new court house the assessor Is authority tor for tile the statement that there will bo be a further de rease this year these decreases alone must automat iely increase tax as s on oil the remaining property of 0 the bounty and yet we are about to be wheedled into adding more bonds more interest and sinking funds for something om ething that is 13 not urgent that will not help the county as a whole ind and is being promoted by a comparative handful of cedar city main street boys largely for selfish mot ves will taxpayers follow them such policy continued means ultimate confiscation of their iroD ro perty erty bourt house not to last aluch lon longer loner b er about th the e most deliberate attempt to 0 mislead the public has been lif in the he statements concerning the condition of the present court house obviously it if taxpayers were made to believe that a new court house is imperative the next tour years itis it Is a good argument for re ra removal so the proponents have stopped at nothing typical of their is that it was commenced in 1849 parowan carowan settled until 1851 the facts concerning the court house may be found in another article elsewhere in this issue suffice it to say here that it Is in good condition an iipp ample to meet the countes coun tys needs tor for many years to come particularly is a this true if our valuations dinue to decrease as they are do las ing at present we hope they will not but what assurance have we As tor for Pa rowans demanding a new one inside of tour four years or twice that many the mere suggestion on Is preposterous give us credit for or the perception to see sec the futility of such auch a demand even it there were occasion for or it jurors and ana witness costs magnified the difference in the cost of jury and witness service tor for court in par owan or in cedar city has been mad unified many times for the sake of 0 this pet scheme of the big twenty 01 actual figures for the last term ot of court published recently in the times so readers might see tor for them selves rather than accepting wild I 1 statements made to deceive voters showed that tile the cost for jurors and witnesses at that term wai more than it if the term had been held at cedar of 0 that amount the county paid 1620 1520 and the state the previous term the difference was with about the same proportionate cost to county and state for the remaining term this year it if all the jurors which have been drawn appear the actual difference will be you can verity verify those figures tor for yourself ln in dictations are that the state will pay all the costs tor for the coming term as the cases to be tried are state cases it the jurors who live west of cedar are arc not summoned as Is usually the case then the difference will be less than the above figure so all this big fuss about jurors and witness costs simmers down to an actual difference of less than 60 50 a year to the county and not more than to the state compare this with interest on a court house bond or even with rental and re modeling costs cost for temporary quarters other erroneous statements the countes Coun tys population was published as in excess of tor for the soul purpose of searing scaring people into voting for or removal the law says that whenever a countes coun tys population exceeds that figure all county officers must maintain their offices at the county seat and to make it appear that cedar might lose the officers who now live and maintain offices there the big twenty element published this false statement in the face ot of a government census less than three months before which gave the he countes Coun tys population lon ah 16 they referred to a church census to support their figures when as a matter of fact the church census was not completed until more than a month later and then gaye gave only the church population of the inference was given out that the school district would tree free in five years and the school people were not responsible foj toe that bit of deception either As a matter of tact fact it the district issues no more bonds in that time and prosperity beturne in sufficient measure that the regular annual bond payments can be made it will still be in debt between fifty and seventy five thoua andrut and But under the program as ag planned a new school building is to be built tor for cedar before the end ot of five years in which event there probably will be added another hundred or hundred and twenty five thousand the repeated statements concerning Pa rowana rowans decrease in tion and valuation have been equal ly deceptive browan lost irk in population except that some residents resident weri were excluded from rom the city by reason of reducing our corporate 11 ll mits the same action accounted tor for decreased valuation until last year when we had a decrease 0 of about 36 35 pei per cent as compared with a decrease for or the entire county ot of about 6 5 per cent it has even been whispered that parowan carowan Is not united with reference to retention it if such auch an array ot of misstatements statements have bave been in order to 0 o deceive the public into voting lor for removal then certainly the valid valia arguments for I 1 lt must be lie gliga ble PT |