Daily Los Angeles herald., 1878-08-27
8al SugfIss 8erala.
UsN omith Answsrs tAs sacramsn'
&, s'Bos.r

- ~
Col. q. H, Smith, Of this city, |
publishes q letter In the Sacramen-
10 Rec In reply to the article in that
paper tracing the change In the
INV o. Public Administration of es-
ontesof persons dying intestate. AS
~ pnbllshed the Bees article, we
Eoproduce Col. Smiths reply. He
M:
Los ANGELES, Aug. 2l, 1878.
Xp1ToR BEE:-My attention has
beon called to an editorial in your
unpor In which 1t fs seriously
CHARGED that bill introduced by
- In the Senate last session "in-
ocleatod the murder Of Tullis, and
conoed the murder OF nu-
Movous other citizens to
- ccntemplated.n Were the
hill deserving OF such q censure,
ard we're I solely responsible for it,
yoo might with equal propriety at
fRibote the responsibility for the
murder to the author OF the law
that created the Office Of Public
Administrator, or to any one Of the
numerous voters (of whom, possi-
bly,, you are one) who elected the
particular incumbent of that office
Who committed tho crime, unless,
Indeed, in the latter case, 1t ls to be
Supposed that Dye was q good
man when elected, but weak,
and that he would not
have fallen but fer the tempta-
tIon created by . wicked Legisls-
tufs. In point Of fact, however, 1
en- not any more responsible for
the bill than any one else who
votcd for it. The bill was intro
duood by me ct the request Of q
gontleman from San Francisco, but
owing to some mistake-either Of
myself or the clerk-it was not
statod In the journal to be "by re-
quoet.n This was, however, fully
explained to the Judiciary Com
mittee on two occasions. it having
been re-c0mmitted to that Commit
~ on my motion on account OF
my being dissatisfied with some Of
~ provisions. The Committee
fully understood that the bill did
not stand on my recommends
tion. but on Its own merits;
and it received at the hands Of
The Committee the most critical
examination. afterwards ex-
pIained to several members of the
House that the bill was introduced
BY me ssby request" and that I did
not wish to be considered RESPONSE
BILE for its Introduction. Among
others I made this explanation to
Mr.. Swift, and requested him to
make 1t to the House. I did this
because the bill as originally in
troduced was objectionable In many
particulars. and I was anxious that
my connection with 1t should be
fully understood. As the bill pass
Cd the House I considered it entire
~ uDobjectionable, aud therefore
do not desire to escape the respon-
sibi1Ity of having voted for it.
Your objection to the amend
ment is grounded upon view of
human nature that could hardly
have been expected to occur to the
Legislature. For the whole
strength OF your argument lies in
the implied proposition that such
monstefs as Dye are common, and
likely often to be elected Public Ad-
ministrators. Ii this view of hui
man nature Is correct, then we
have reached condition Of things
for which there is absolutely no
remedy. For there is quite rs
strong an antecedent probabil-
NY that the next of kin or
some other person entitled to ad.
mtnistration would commit murder
- Public Administrator. Indeed
the probability is much stronger
For Public Administrator, being
under heavy bonds, and exercising
his functions under the supervision
Of the Court, aud also under the
critical inspection o: all parties in
terested In the estate, could
hardly have to do more than
to earn his legal fees, while
the next Of kin entitled
to distribution would be sure of re-.
ceiving not only his fees, but also
= part of the whole of the estate.
Your objection, therefore, applies
with at least equal force to every
other class Of persons entitled to
administer as to Public Adminis-
traitors. There is, therefore, If you
are right, absolutely no remedy,
unless you can devise some means
Of abolishing death and adminis-
tratf0n altogether.
fortunately 1t is only among peo-
pie profoundly and hopelessly cor
rupt, that such crimes as Dyes are
st all common, and the morality of
California is not in such condition
that its Legislature would have been
justified In considering crimes like
that Of the Sacramento Public Ad-
ministrator otherwise than as mon
strous and exceptional. Atall events
there IL nothing in the character OF
my own constituency to lead me to
suspect that precaution against
such crimes was necessary, and it
was not to be anticipated that
should have q worse opinion Of
other communities. Respectfully,
your obedient servant,
GEORGE HI. SMITH.
na~k-l-k