The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1885-10-15
NO.


edness against me, my demurrer to that
return, and my replication to that return,
in which l denied that there was any in
debtedness en- my part to the State. Bar
ton s statement to the contrary is a mis-
representation. On page u of the opin-
ion Of the Court, the following language
will be found, which refutes Bartons s
reckless statements
The Auditor, in his return, says The
said petitioner has improperly and with
out authority of law drawn from the
Treasury during his term of Office the sum
OF SIS, 4l2.87. He does not explain how
this is possible under the system of guards
and checks and balances used in the pay
ment ofmoney out of the Treasury of the
State but the record in this case shows
that every dollar paid to the Attorney
General has been paid upon the warrants
of the Auditor, and often certificates from
the clerk Of this court, and of the Circuit
Court Of Richmond city, and the Supreme
Court CT the United States, according to
law
1t viii be seen that the very sum mem
TONED, which Barton claims was unlaw-
fully paid me, was declared by the court
to have been paid me according to lmc.'
A majority Of the Court of Appeals con-
Cured in this opinion, while Judge Lewis
dissenting opinion was rested on the ques-
ton as to whether mandamus was the
proper remedy or not.
On page 10 Of said opinion the court,
use the following plain language in abso-
lutte generation from all blame on my
part
1T was stated in the argument, and adj
mitted by the eminent and able counsel on
both sides Of this case at bar, that Gen
eral James G. Field, the distinguished and
honored immediate predecessor of petit
tioner in the office ofjAttorney- General Of
Virginia, had placed exactly the same con-
struction upon the law regulating the fees
Of office, and had drawn from the Treasury
Of the State the same fees of Office as At
torney-General Blair had done upon the
proper certificates of the clerks Of courts,
State and Federal. and upon the audit al
lowance and warrants of the Auditor of
the State that he is in exactly similar case
with petitioner, his success r.
ut is, we think, abundantly clear, from
the record, that there can be no possible
legal or moral wrong in the acceptance of
their fees of Office by either Attorney-Gen-
eral Field OF Attorney G eneral Blair as
they were paid to them, and they accepted
them, under a claim of right and under
the construction and practice of the law
placed on the statutes by the clerks of the
courts, the Auditor of Public Accounts,
and the Treasurer of the State. They all
acted conscientiously in what they be-
lieyed to be the discharge of official duty
and legal right.
1t will be found upon an investigation
that this man Barton's letter to the Dis
patch is but a rehash of his report to the
Legislature, and l have shown shat hist own
party was too decent to adopt it, and that
the Supreme Court Of this State has repu-
dated it and thus it is that Barton, like
all disoredited witnesses, is now bawling
out against the jury and court that would
not accept his statements. His attack
upon Judge Fauntleroy, Of the Court of
who delivered the opinion of the
court, is so mean and malicious that it
not only deserves, but will no doubt re-
ceive. the condemnation and contempt not
only Of the bench and bar of the State, who
have respect for tribunals of justice, but
by all good people, regardless of party affili-
ations. when judges are thus assailed by
a man who p.etends to be lawyer, Justice
would soon be brought into disrepute if
by good people. Barton's
letter is utterly Inconsistent in this, that
ia the first portion Of it he attempts to
show that the legality of my fees was not
sanctioned by the court, While in the con-
gliding portion Of it he rails out against
Judge Fauntleroy because he does sustain
me in my official conduct
As to Darton's informant on that it was
my purpose upon the adjournment of the
General Assembly to rssign my Office to
receive an appointment from the Governor
to fill an unexpired term, and thus to de-
feat the PURPOSE of the Act No. 147, it is
absolutely false. [ never conceived sucha
purpose, nor did l ever see or hear it sug-
geoted until l read Barton letter have
now given the public my understanding of
the law and facts Of this matter and have
shown it an effort Oh Barton's part to ap-
npol from, hic av,n ! eciS1at1,rn that uouId
not endorse him, and from the Supreme
Court, that repudiated him, and to set up
his rejected committees report as the law
and facts Of my case.
The reason Of my delay in answering
this letter is that l find it impossible to
keep up with the small pop-guns that are
constantly firing in my rear.
Very respectfully,
F. s. BLAIR.