Los Angeles herald., 1892-11-06


principal official appoints deputies t
tile full limit allowed by law, and whel
it is possible to do 30, conslrues it t.
mean more than it does, at the expeDs
of the dear people who pay all these lif
tie bills. The law of 1889 is etiil u
force 30 far as the present district at
torney is concerned.
HIS CRIMINAL BUSINESS.
Mr.. McLachlan claims that l havt
misrepresented his record in crimina
cases. I did not deem it necessary, ano
do not now deem it necessary, to raise
to the dignity of criminal cases drunk
and disorderly, disturbing the peace, ol
petty violations of law cogn;zabe by
Justices courts only; but do think.
and behave that the public will agree
with me, that a fair test of the ability
and efficle ocy OF the district attorney in
the conduct of his Office is evidenced by
the criminal cases actually handled and
managed by him in the superior court
during his term of Office. My figures
did not include the cases inherited by
him from the prior administration, but,
on the contrary, included only all the
cases commenced after the 1st of Janu
ary, 1890, and up to about the 18th OF
October, 1892. Ii the cases of the old
administration we're included in the sum
total of cases which 1 have credited to
him, his record for efficiency would be
worse by far The register of criminal
actions of the superior court, volumes l
and 2, show that the first case arising
under McLachlan's administration was
in January, 1890, and was numbered
1856. Thereafter cases are numbered
consecutively, and at the time made
my Downey speech the highest number
was 1150. A number of these cases are
appeals from municipal courts, and were
prosecuted, not by the district attorney,
but by the city attorneys of the respec-
tive municipalities. Excluding these,
the record of the superior court shows
that 276 is the total number of criminal
cases handled by Mr.. McLachlan and
his deputies, and it still remains a fact
which Mr.. McLachlan does not think
it advisable to deny, that nearly 25 per
cent of all these cases were dismissed by
him; that he was defeated in 36, ac-
cepted pleas of guilty in 49 and secured
81 verdicts, including in the term ''ver-
diets" Judgments on technical points of
law in cases appealed from Justices
courts, the remainder of the 276 cases
being disposed of in various ways. The
profession will smile when the gentle.
man lines himself up with the Hon. s.
NJ. White.
THOSE TAX CASES.
Those tax cases of the county of Los
Angeles against the Southern Pacific
Railroad company seem to afford the
.entleman great deal of uneasiness.
Why were the cases not prosecuted with
diligence? Why did it take the district
Ittorney year and half to bring a
demurrer to an issue and get ruling?
Why is it that the matter has slumbered
Until attention is called to it by my
)owney speech and the district attorney
8 reminded that election day is at hand?
The gentleman says: "Judge Wade de-
ided that the actions were not barred by
he statute of limitations. I
rave won every point. etc." Let US see
bout this. Judge Wade, in his opin.
on, first disposes of the one, two, three
nd four year limitations, and having
hown that the actions are clearly barred |
lnder thoee sections of the statute, he
ays: "There is another section of the |
tatute of limitations which is appealed
o by the plaintiff in an alternative !
ort OF a manner as embracing actions
or the collection of state and county
axes tsec. 338, sub. 1. @. G. @. P.). This
,rescribes five years as the period OF
imitation for an action upon a judgment
n decree of any court of the United
states or of any state within the United
states. 1t is sought to bring these &C.
ions within the purview of this pro-
'ision by reference to sec. 3716 P. c.,
which provides that every tax has the
fleet of a Judgment against the per-
on" etc.
The learned Judge holds in effect that
he action is barred unless it can be
within the meaning of the last
ection. Finally. his honor says: GAS
he only authority deemed strictly ap-
'licable to the pleadings in the case con-
edes the possibility OF maintaining a
uit for tax as an action on judg-
nent, the plaintiff may have the benefit |!
# the possibility" Upon this possibil-
ty, which has not the shadow of prob
."ility, the ehamefully neglected cases
we're bolstered up by an indulgent court
md granted further lease of life. The |
abroad company has pleaded the same
,ar in it's answer. The statute of linn
tations, therefore, still remains the great |
ssue in the cases, and ia still undeter-
mined.
The misconstruction placed upon my
words by the honorable (?) gentleman
With reference to what means 1 may
,ossess, have no weight with any fair
minded man and wien Mr.. McLachlan
las attained sufficient experience in
fairs temporal, he will realize the fact
hat neither poverty nor wealth makes
he man; the true measure is whether
n not, as men, we have performed our
luties faithfully-he as servant of the
,eople, and as a private citizen.
In conclusion, Would say that am
lot supported in my candidacy for the
'ffice of district attorney by Montafio or
1auterio.
My opponent forgot to say anything
n his speech concerning the cases
gainst the latter gentleman, but the
ecords show that they were never tried
'ut were all dismissed. 1 give them as
ollows:
No. 52s. indictment; September s,
891, dismissed.
No. $50, indictment; September 8,
891, dismissed.
No. $40, Indictment; September s,
891, dismissed.
No. 54l. indictment; September s,
SOL, dismissed.
Mr.. Damron is not making any
peeches in support of me in this
ampaign, but is using his oratory in
.dvancing the candidacy of his friend,
he present incumbent.
During the last three years and half