UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.
Digital Provenance
Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room
Publisher
University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries
Transcription
V I % Subject: / h 7' January 10, 1924. Contract-Water Supply - Fillmore, Utah. Mr. George H. Smith, General Attorney, Salt hake City, Utah. Dear Sir: On October 27th X wrote you asking that the contract which you had prepare!be changed to conform to the suggestions made in Mr. Comstock’s letter to me of October 32nd, copy of which was sent you. On October 31st you r turned the contracts with a letter stating that the changes had been made. I then sent the contracts in question to Mr. Comstock, stating that they had been rewritten as requested. X now have a letter from the General Manager in which he says: “This agreement was, in due course, sent to Mr. Calvin, who now returns same, quoting from Mr. Bennewitz in part as follows: ‘The contract which you submitted to me with your letter of December 31st I believe is the same contract which we previously reviewed, as it doss not appear to me th->t any changes have been made in it*. Examination of the document seems to confirm the above statement, and I shall be glad if you will kindly have it rewritten in accordance with my letter of October 18th”. Naturally, I am somewhat emabrrassed by the situation and I am wondering if the wrong set of contracts was returned to me by your office. I enclose eight copies of the contract as last submitted Yours truly, A. $. Hals ted. A$H:S TcTcn—ol a Mr. Comstock
