The evening Argus. [volume] (Rock Island, Ill.) 1861-1871, 1869-03-17
Communicated.
THE LAST ACT OF A RADICAL ADMIN
IsTRATI0N,

EDITOR or THE ANGUS. Sir-The clos |
ing act of the late radical city administra-
ton should not be suffered TO 60 into obIl'
won without some record of its eXtrROrdl
nary character. When the members of the
council, Oh Monday evening, were standing
around in the council chamber, and before
they we're called to order, Mr.. jackson, the
late radical city attorney handed bill
amounting to nearly $500, to Aldermen
Hawes and Shaw, the late finance commit
tee lboth radicalsl nearly all Of which WAS
for constructive or imaginary services. a
| good deal Of whispering was carried on be-
| tween the parties, before the council was
called to order, bat when they were called
to order the whole game was apparent TO
| the most casual observer. Alderman HaWes,
for the finance committee, handed Mr.. Jack.
sons bill, Of $fS3.70 for imaginary services,
TO Mayor Murdoch, who attempted to rush
it through without even having 1t read.
Objection was made to that effort, and then
Mr.. Murdock made some general statements
in regard to the hill, pagnttylng the imag'-
nary services of his city attorney, &c, &c,
! aud making u speech, asking the incoming
| administration to retain him. This did not
satisfy the democratic aldermen of the Just.
ness of the bill, and finally, with some ap.
parent reluctance, Mr. Murdoch directed the
| clerk to read the bill in full. Alderman
Lloyd ldem.), after it was read, made OBJ
! lection to il, lwhy didn't he or some one else
| move to lay it on the table, and call for the
yeas and nays, and let It lie over till it could
! be investigated p and Mr.. Murdock then
made another long speech urging its pay.
ment Alderman Roseuheld Trad. then
moved that the bill be allowed, Alderman
| Shaw trad.) seconded the motion, and Mr..
! Murdoch hurrledly put it to vote, Aldermen
! Rosendeld, Shaw, Spencer and HAYES TALL
RAIDS responded AYE - and Aldermen
! l.lovd, Fries, Wagner and Skinner all dem.
ocrats) responded "no.' Mayor Murdock
| ,rad) then declared the bill allowed, thus
taking the responsibility of it upon his own
shoulders. Alderman Skinner (dem,), not
satisfied with the proceeding, suggested that
the city was paying for services not rendered,
and 1t was al old adage that "a good pay.
master paid when his work was done
Mayor Murdoch replied that 'the bill would
not be paid now that it was only intended
to approve Of it by the board, when the
fact was that the bill was then allowed and
ordered to be paid.
That being all the business before the old
board, the new members were then sworn in.
Now, there are two or three things in re.
gard to this most extraordinary transaction
Of the late radical board, which provoke
comment:
LIST. The bill is nearly all for retaining
fees in cases never tried, What is a retain.
ing fee and why is such fee required ?
A retaining fee is an advance payment for
services yet to be rendered. Why do the
lawyers require a retaining fee lst Be.
cause they thus secure something for servi.
ces to be rendered in case their client is,
what is called, "poor pay And "a, Be.
cause it enables them TO say to other per
sons, desiring their services in the same
case, that they are engaged. Does any
lawyer think of charging any one Of his
clients q retaining fee, in every case, when
h. is the regular attorney for that client
No. Such thing is uuheard Of. For in
stance, Judge Peasants, before be was cleo.
ted Judge, was Mr.. Cables attornev.i e., he
was considered retained by Mr. c. in all his
business when his services were wanted
but he never thought Of charging for serv..
ces not rendered-or any other lawyer that
] ever heard Of before this jackson case
Besides, there is a city ordinance fixing the
salary of city attorney at $500 year, and
any man elected city attorney is considered
retained in al city cases, It is not neces.
ss-y, therefore, for him to charge retainers