991661

ReadAboutContentsHelp
A. M. Kent requested pay for the days he was sick and unable to perform his duties as a police officer. While he was sick the Chief of Police dismissed him from the police force because he did not receive notice that he was sick. Mr. Kent claimed that he had sent notice. The Board of Aldermen granted his claim. See full description in Digital Collections

Pages

991661_Page_26
Indexed

991661_Page_26

State of Washington} County of King} SS John W Sanstrom being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says; that on the 13th day of May 1891 by request of A M Kent he reported to Clerk Squire at Police Headquarter the the aforesaid A M Kent was sick. John W Sansteen Subscribed and sworn to before me this 12th day of Dec 1891 Robt Wilson Notary Public in and for the State of Washington residing at Seattle, Wash.

Last edit over 2 years ago by StephanieJoWebb
991661_Page_27
Indexed

991661_Page_27

J A Trimborn Squire-Latimer Building Room 41 Seattle, Wash Seattle, Wash Dec 14 /91 To the members on Committee on Claims and Messrs. Kittinger & Muldoon; Gentlemen: As chairman of the Committee on Claims (House of Delegates) I desire to say that I have investigated the claim made by Mr A M Kent and still feel that the "favorable report" submitted previously bythe Committee on Claaims is correct. Reap Submitted G V P Lansing Chairman Comon Claims. Refd to P Com & report back to the Committee claims

Last edit over 2 years ago by StephanieJoWebb
991661_Page_28
Indexed

991661_Page_28

Claim of Capt A M Kent re suspension from Police Dept. 1891

Last edit over 2 years ago by StephanieJoWebb
991661_Page_29
Indexed

991661_Page_29

State of Washington County of King A M Kent being first duly sworn on Oath deposes and saysMy bill for One Hundred dollars and seventy three cents is a just honest and equitable bill and there is no fraud about it. I presented the bill accompanied by a certificate from the City Physician and also a statement of my claim to the chairman of the Police Commission, Commissioner Crawford says that no such documents were before the Commissioner. When the bill was taken from the clerk's office the certificate or statement could not be found. but the last time I saw the bill they were attached I thought that an appeal might be legitimately taken from such proceeding, I therefore called in the chairman for the bill. He requested me to go before the audition Committee, which I did. The chairman of the Police Comission Explained to said Committee where the bill had been and what action had been taken. This bill was then taken up and discussed on its merits and received the sanctioin of the auditing committee- Fron there it went to the

Last edit over 2 years ago by StephanieJoWebb
991661_Page_30
Indexed

991661_Page_30

Committee on Finance. Where it remained two weeks and was then endorsed and recommended to be paid. After which it passed the Honorable Board of Aldermen unanimously One week later it came before the House of Delegates and was referred to the committee on Claims. Before the bill had been pesented to the Auditing Committee I had spoken toDr. G O Guy he told me that he was not present when I was dropped from the force but that he would do what he could to assist me in getting my pay. I told Dr. Guy when the Committee on Claims was to meet, he said he would try and go before them, but when the hour arrived he was busy and said you get the bill and I will sign it. When I got the bill I found that the Mayor's signature wasnot onit. I took it to Mayor White who said I signed a wrapper that was around the bill that had been taken off I will now signit where they can't tear it off. He then signed on the back of the bill Ithen presented it to Dr G O Guy He read the statements placed upon it by the Chief of Police. I said you see the Chief of Police is opposing it. He replied what has the Chief

Last edit over 2 years ago by StephanieJoWebb
Displaying pages 26 - 30 of 33 in total