Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1884-04-24
EXTRAsEssIoNAL NOTES.

The following petition against the passage of
the Barry bin has been laid before the Senate:
1--WE desire, most respectfully, TO present our
views in Il brief concise manner relative to
honorable body, pertaining to the thruughSpe
cial contracts enjoyed by and for the benefit of
the merchants and people at large of the State
The contracts referred TO were freely entered
into, our action being based upon the broad and
general business principles which govern trade
and commerce We cannot think the agitation
OF this question by the few almost wholly disin-
terested parties should longer continue, but that
il should be raised above and kept entirely ont
of politics. The merchants have the broad and
open ocean before them, and can compel the
railroad companies to accept fair and Just COM
pensation for their services. The benefits
which flow from competition between rail and
water routes, in our judgment. belong to and
should be enjoyed by the people of this coast,
and any legislation which trammels either the
operations of the one or the other can only be
detrimental to the interests of California The
petition is signed by the following-named mer-
chants Of san Francisco: Murphy, Grant IL Co,
Bachman Bros. Martin Sachs Il Co.. Levi Frank
IL Co., L. Diukelspel Il Co., Rosenbaum & Co.,
NJ Heller x Bros, Schweitzer, Sachs Il Co., Z. Il
:. Heller.
Several Senators seemed to be rather out of
humOr yesterday. The discussion on one of the
amendments to the railroad income tax bill in
trOduced by AsSemblyman Wallace, requiring
the AttOrney-General. instead of the Controller
las contemplated by the bill), to manage dcln-
quent tax suits, led TO some pretty strong Ian
guage by the friends of these respective officials.
Senator Gross having remarked that he had been
informed that an understanding existed between
Controller Dunn and certain legal lJlminaTicS as
to the farming out of these suits, Mr. Dunn was
notified, and came TO the Senate Chamber At
ter a consultation between him and Senator
Keddy. the latter arose and denied, on behalf of
the Controller, that there was any foundation
for the statement. Then Senator Spencer of
Napa took occasion to disagree with Mr. Cross in
the statement that the official conduct of Attor-
explained. The Senator was quite severe on
" Mr.. Marshall, of Kentucky, sir whom he re-
garded as incompetent to fill the office held by
him. Senator Reddy, too, was rather belligeT-
ent and it was beginning to look as though
somebody was about to offer Il resolution to have
things painted red when Senator Murphy
hit upon the happy idea of moving for an ad,
iournment, which was carried and the general
melee ended. The few Republican meml 2rs of
the Senate sat back in their seats and viewed
these little family jars with complacency, if not
highly enjoyable satisfaction.
The Senate did not reach its special order yes
terday-the johnson bill vacating the offices of
the Railroad Commissioners. 1t win come up to
day, however, and will probably be disposed Of
before the hour for the next special Order-the
Barry bill
The Assembly Judiciary Committee is still
wrestling. i'll quiet way, with the question of
the acknowledgements settlement of the rail
road tax cases One of the most interesting por-
tionS of the investigation was the development
of the fact that after the taxes had been paid by
the railroad company most of the attorneys con
nected with the prosecution were satisfactorily
settled with for their fees in the cases by the
receipt OF $500 each from the defendants, and
that if DelmaS had not accepted his 50 500 il was
III all probability because he thought that by
three or four of them calling an extraordinary
session leach having personal AK that wanted
grlnding), he could get joker bill through,
the object of which would not be detected and
which would yield him his full $4,000 fee with
out any soul-harrOwing reductions. As aprOpoS
"a, &c Oh
mittee in its work, the Santa Cruz Seatiaci has
interviewed Mr.. Lesser, one of the attorneys for
that county in these tax eases, and who makes
this explanation OF his acceptance of the fee:
=" In what way was the counsel fees deter
mned?" asked the reporter.
when went to san Francisco in February"
responded Mr.. Lesser, found that an agree
ment had been made TO take the full amount of
the taxes of the railroad, leaving undetermined
the question OF interest and counsel fees. This
was the proposition the Chronicle, the leading or
gan of the antl-mOnopoly, made and which the
railroad agreed to. The Attorney-General agreed
to accept the payment, and it stipulated
that the money should be paid subject to such
further litigation as may be necessary to deter
mine the question of interest and penalties
The Attorney General accepted the Chronicles
proposition, deeming the payment of about
SS00,G00 into the State fund an advantage to the
finances, while the State loses right to the re-
maindeT, If ii had any
who had the right to determine the amount
of fees counsel should receiver
'Of course. the question of counsel fees was q
matter entirely for the attorneys to determine
They could release all of it if they wished,
because no part Of it went either into State or
county treasures. found at the same time
that the railroad had offered to pay $4,000 on
account of attorneys fees, which offer some of
the attorneys, of whom was not one, agreed to
accept and receipt for the money as payment of
counsel fees"
''What move was then made, Mr. Lesser?'
You know there is Il great question whether
the 10 per cent. fees are allowable or not After
the money for the taxes had been paid over the
division of the $1,000 among the attorneys was
those who ought to get Il share of it, 1t was
some weeks afterwards that l sought Judge
Terry, and we discussed the matter"
'' Have you any objection to telling what
gentlemen were present at that meeting?'
. None at all there were senator Langford of
san Joaquin, and Railroad Commissioner Foote
both pronounced anti-railroad men, and between
the four of us the matter was discussed"
at?''
Certainly you may. 1t was concluded that
there was no possible impropriety in the accept
ance of our share of the fee inasmuch as it was
simple payment on account. Judge Terry and
| agreed to accept the amount and receipt for it
as a payment on account Ii we can get the
balance of the ten per cent. we shall certainly
endeaVor TO do so. Lawyers don't generally take
less than they can get, he laughingly added.
How doesit come that you got 81 900 less than
the other attorneys
" You see Waymire and Baggett were employed
by the state Controller for the State, and they had
no employment from any of the counties, while
| was employed by the county in addition to my
employment by the Attorney y-General