The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1885-08-27
A Clear Statement.
CAMPAIGN CANARDS EXPOSED.-IN-
TERyIEW WITH ATTORNEY
GENERAL BLAIR.

Stanton, on Friday last, and the edito
OF the VIKGINIAN called on him at thu
Virginia House, and directed his attention
to the late criticisms in the Staunton YIN
dacatoi, in regard to the fees paid to hin
by the State. His replies to the question.
asked are clear and convincing, and are a,
follows
Question: see some of the Democratic
papers are again discussing certain fees
paid you by the State since you have beer
Attorney-General. Will you explain tt
me briefly what is the real truth in regar(
to those fees ?
Answer, The present criticisms by
some of the Bourbon Democratic press
are now made to discount my severe ar
raignment of that party on the stump.
The charges are simply ridiculous in the
light OF the real facts of the matter.
The salary of the Attorney General il
fixed by law at ~, 500 per annum, and that
salary is for certain specified services-to
wit Services rendered for the State in the
Supreme Court of the United States. Cir.
cult and District Courts of the United
States, the Court of Appeals of Virginia,
and the Circuit Court of the City of Rich
mond. These are the only courts in
which the Attorney General is required to
represent the State, and they are named
in the act itself.
NO additional compensation was ever
paid me for services in any of the above
courts. There were a number of claims
due the State that needed legal attention
in other courts than the above, and the
Auditor and the Governor employed me to
represent the State in those courts and
cases. The labor was wholly outside of
my official duties.
One case was i'll the courts of the State
of North Carolina and involved about
$20, 900. | suppose no Bourbon will hold
| am compelled to appear for the Com
moawealth in the courts of other states.
Another case was in the Circuit Court of
Mechlenburg county, court wholly out
side OF my duties, and 1 saved large
calm for the state. Another claim was
some coupon cases in the Circuit Court of
Albemarle, where was sent by the Gov
ernor, at the request of the ATTORNEY for
Commonwealth OF that county, and | won
the cases for the State, and without going
into detail. every extra. fee paid me was
for services extending over two years-in
courts where the Attorney General was
not required by any law to practice, and
where l was employed by proper officers of
the State to represent the State. Some
one was needed as lawyer, I understood
the business and hence was employed, and
in every instance | won the cases and saved
large sums of money for the State
Question.-Is it unusual for the Attor-
ney-General to be employed and to be paid
extra fees for extra official services?
Answer.-No, indeed. 1t is quite COM
mon practice. Attorney General Daniel
received over 81 900 of fees over and above
his salary of $500 as it then was. for
extra official services, and no complaint
was ever made of it, And as to the legal
fees paid me as taxes in the costs, Attor-
ney-General Field was paid exactly SIM
liar fees.
Question not these fees investi-
gated by the last Democratic General AS.
sembly. and if so, what was the result?
Answer. Yes. There was committee
that investigated the Whale matter, fol-
weeks, had all the evidence before them
and there were two reports-a majority
and minority report, but the Dem ocratic
Legislature refused to take any action on
the reports, and the whole investigation
fell to the ground as a miserable failure
1t was originated by some Bourbon law
yer who wanted my office, and who wanted
me removed so he,could get 1t, or to make
some campaign material for their party.
Question. Has the question of your
right to the fees been tested in court, if
so with what result
Answer. Yes sir, the Legislature hay
ing failed to act in the matter as stated, l
deemed it due to myself and friends that
all questions about the fees should be
settled. I, myself, brought suit against the
Auditor to test this very matter.
1t arose by the Auditor claiming that
my salary should be withheld because 1
was indebted to the State for fees paid me
to which was not entitled.
Y oI~I
from the Supreme Court of the State to
compel the payment of my salary free
from all set-off, and the Auditor appeared
and pleaded all of the fees complained of
as set-offs- and the very question was pre-
sented to the court whether the fees paid
me were legal or not The majority of the
Court, through Judge Fauntleroy, de-
clared as follows. after reciting all of the
facts
'But the record in this case shows that
ecery dollGr paid to the Attorney General
has been paid upon the warrants of the
Auditor, = according to law
Again it is said by the Court
ut was stated in the argument and adj
mitted by the eminent and able counsel on
both sides of the case at bar. that General
James G. Field, the distinguished and
honored immediate predecessor of petit
tioner (Attorney-G Blair in the
office of Acknowledgement of Virginia ha6
placed exactly the same construction upor
the law regulating his fees of Office. an6
had 1rawn from the treasury of the State
the same fees of office as Attorne y- Genera
Blair had done.
It is, we think, abundantly clear, from
the record, that there can be no possible
legal or moral wrong in the acceptance Of
these fees of Office by either Attorney
General Field, or Attorney G eneral Blair
as they were paid to them and they &C
cepted them under claim Of right. ana
u''der the construction and practice of til,
laac placed on the statutes by the clerks o.
courts. the Auditor of Public Account,
and the Treasurer of the State
The Court then declared the Auditor
defense not good, and ordered the saia,p
TO pc paid me, free from any counter
sim Of fees improperly paid me.