Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-02-22
THEY MADE SOME SARCASTIC Rru,pKs

THEY MADE SOME SARCASTIC REMARKS
Regarding the levy and retired, and then be-
gan This aglsatlon. As to the street sprinkHne,
Judge Mckune knew better when he stated
what ne did. He knew, just as well as l
know, the truth about that. The Mayor here
read over and explained the tax levy:
General Fund . n ~ sIIo 40
/ School Fund - n IN % oe0
Fire Department Fund - O d % 000
Police Department Fund q Ia ~ s00
Fowle Bond Redemption Fund 0 OF 5000
Levee and Drainage Fund. -. is 10000
Total. ..,.......................s - 90
The city receives from licenses SIS. 600.
| Court fines about 81, 500, harbor dues about
81 20O Add these items to the general fund
and it gives S139, 000 and 50 per cent. is
SIG. 450; surplus on water rents $40. 600 and
90 per cent. is $4,000. There is left to the
general fund from general tax, $40, 500; IL
censes. tnes and harbor dues. S13, 050; water
rents, SIC: 600; Total, $50, 050. And of this
$50 000 is left after the PAYMENT %, Of
salaries, etc, $50. 900 for street sDrinkline
and street repairs, so the streets will be
sprinkled and the streets repaired. Now
Judge Mckune, said the Mayor, knew ali
this as well as |, and l claim it is ungentla-
manly and unfair to speak as he has, MIR.
Catlin is not here to speak for the Trustees.
de is absent from the city, else ne would ap-
pear here and make statement concerning
the threatened suits, those brought and the
whole bond matter. AS concerned his own
acts, the Mayor declared he had done his
duty, and would continue to do so, andshould
do it fearless of consequences and without
regard to any attempts to turn him from the
! right course.
JUDGE H. o. BEATTY.
Judge Beatty then addressed the meeting
| lie was surprised at the mass of misrepre
sentation presented. Malicious, untrue and
false statements had been Embellishments
without a shadow Of truth, and what was
more, they had often been exposed. If he
only had time, were not the hour so late. he
could and was anxious to make some ex.
posures that would place certain very philan-
| thropic people in a most unenviable light
| He had been attacked and abused He cared
! little for these things, but did care for mis-
representations. The truth was that wears
4 ago Judge McKune became his antagonist
He had plan for wiping out the city debt,
and Mckune had plan. His plan became
/ the law and McKune's didn't, and he had
never had the Judges forgiveness since. I'm
der his plan the Funded Debt Commission
/ had
BOUGHT IN
S772, 544 of the city debt, paying for it at the
rate of 253 cents for every 81 of bond. Nc.
| Kune's plan was to have no redemption, but
| employ lawyers and fight the bondholders
! Now, Mrs. Fowle had about S24, 700 of bonds.
Judge McKune's plan was to let her sue.
! I'll defend the city, said he. He did, and
charged right round bill for it, and went
| to Washington and defended, and read
all the law Judge Mesick read tonight. But
she got judgment, and the Supreme Court
enforced her claim, and read the law diffy-
emily, and they had to go to the Legislature
and get bill to fund the debt at per cent.
and Mrs. Fowles claim, with costs, amounted
! to $50 COO, and on that you are paying per
cent. interest to-day. That is a sample of
Judge McKune's plan. Here is mine got
100000 of the city in small sums, and have
paid S772 544 of your debt with it. Which
do you like best ? This whole scheme is cot
up to give certain lawyers big fees and send
them on to Washington, to come back with
their tails between their legs. Just after the
flood of 1862 the bondholders wanted the
speaker to sue the city and
HE REFUSED, :,
| And told them there was a limit to taxation.
Ever since he has stood between the city and
ruinous litigation. Last year German bond
holder was about to sue. The speaker adj
vised the Trustees to levy the tax the law
commands, and they promised to do it, but
didn't. He did that, not for the bondholders,
as falsely charged here, but to protect the
| city, in which he had his ali, from law suits.
Last winter a bondholder sued for 81 900.
! Mayor Turner brought the complaint to him.
| He told the Mayor there was no defense to
! the suit; it was small. but opened the door,
| He offered to go to San Francisco aud see the
parties, and believed he could settle it. But
the Mayor went to Messrs. Catl1n and Hay.
mond, and after some months of considera
ton they too concluded just as he did, that
there was no defense, and it was compromised
at less favorable rates than if done earlier as
he had advised, and the city had to pay at
torneys' fees and a round sum TO hush it up.
Next he heard that many suits were about to
be brought, and he went to San Francisco
and saw the lawyer OF the bondhclders, and
convinced him that the old coupons were
barred by the statute. Then they proposed
to sue on those not barred, and SO not be
caught mapping again. He told them that was
BAD POLICY.
Then they offered a compromise, which the
Trustees refused. Then he went once more
to San Francisco, and then the compromise
was agreed upon, that 100 cents should be
levied and they would take all hands off ~
"He represents the bondholders ?" Indeed?
Why for sixteen years he had refused thou
sands of dollars of fees of the bondholders
offered him to become their attorney. For
years he had given legal services to the city
of his home and charged and received nothing.
All he ever got was S725. He spent over
$500 in getting the law through, in getting
up meetings, printing, etc, and of all that,
except Sl5, he paid every cent out of his own
pocket, and not dollar has been charged Co
the city. Other lawyers have got of the city
$4,000 for single service. Now that kind
GET UP PUBLIC MEETINGS
" 1
of his home. He had done a million dollars
worth of work for this city and never charged
the city one solitary dime. He didn't boast,
but was compelled now to speak out. Suit
after suit he had defended, and advised for
Sacramento without fee. La the Green and
Trainor case he got S725, and in one other
case he got S25. Not cent for office rent or
expenses to and from San Francisco had the
Funded Debt Commissioners even charged to
the city or the fund. All their expenses they
have paid out OF their pockets, and for the
pride Of success and their city. In one
single case he worked four months for the
city and refused to take cent and one of
the officers at last laid S25 on his desk, and
walked out. He owned no bond or coupon,
and was in the employ of no bondholder and
all the town knows it. The tax levy is not
heavy. We can stand it and pay it. If now
this city refuses to keep its contract, and do
goes into law suits and fees lawyers, he is
DONE WITH IT
As Bond Commissioner. He will stand no
more misrepresentation and abuse. He has
correspondent with every bondholder of the
city He knows them ALL The amount of
unpaid coupons in 1869 900 ; of these Sl67, 900
of the barred. and S159,000 (about) of the new
coupons the Fund Commissioners have got in.
There is about $500 600 Of unbarred coupons
now outstanding, in all 5000, 900, half being
barred. If the city rescinds the tax levy, it
at once plunges into litigation with every
bondholder of the city, and ruin is the result.
He had kept off the lawsuits for years-he
could do it no longer if the city breaks its
faith. As to refunding he had never found
but one bondholder willing to refund, and
that man holds $780, Old Daniel Meyer
will no more agree to refund than to give a
silver dollar for silver half dollar-no more
than thrust his hand in the fire. AS to the
city being unable to pay, that is not true.
SHE is ABLE TO PAY.
If she don't keep faith in this case, what con-
tractor can we get who will do our levee
work as proposed, and wait for next years
levy? He would be a fool to do it, with such
an example. City credit is the best of things
we must keep it. With that, and we stand
r II