The Dalles times-mountaineer. [volume] (The Dalles, Or.) 1882-1904, 1892-08-06
OUR POSITION.

In the editorial remarks of the
T1MEs .MoUNTAINEER on the letter of
Hon. W. Lair Hill, we said that SEN
ator Dolph had not been identified
with the o. R. & n. Go. since his cleo
ton to the United States senate, and
to this our neighbor, the Sun, makes
the following exceptions:
TIMES ,MoUNTAINEER published the letter
of Hon. W. Lair Hill and editorial COM
ments theron on July 18th, but it Is not too
late to call attention to one glaring error
our friend makes in the assertion that 'tSen.
| ator Dolph's identification with the o. R. &
N Co. ceased with his election to the u 8.
senate ten wears ago." We feel that our
friend has dropped into this mistake mad.
vertantly and through ignorance of the facts.
On June l, 1883, Dolph, as attorney for this
road, fought to prevent the condemnation
of the land nece sary for the construction
of Cascades Locks. This was after his elec
ton as senator. (See page 524, volume l6,
Federal Reporter.) Also on April 27, 1888.
Dolph appeared as attorney before the su-
preme cou.t for this corporation, also on
March 81, 1890, and finally as late as April
25, 1892, only few months ago, this last
case being "The Oregon Railway and Nay
igation Company vs. The Oregonian Rail-
way Company" These cases are matters
of record and will possibly weigh as against
the tare opinion of the TINES MoUNrAINEER
that Dolph has not been attorney for this
corporation ''since he became senator ten
years ago."
In the article referred to we distin-
guished between being identified with |
railroad interests and acting as law
yer in professional capacity before |
any court in favor of corporations, and |
said we did not consider an attorney
identified with crime because he de-
Tended a murderer or robber Our
brother must have read the article
carelessly, or else he would have no
ticed the distinction, and when We said !
that Mr.. Dolph had not been identified
with the railroad company we intend
ed to use the word in its correct Gig
MITIGATION. OF course Mr.. Dolph has
acted as attorney for railroad corpora
tions before the supreme court; so has
Senator Mitchell and other leading
lawyers IN congress. Even Senator
Edmunds has acted in the same capac.
ity, although the charge of duplicity
was never made against him. The
employment of the leading minds OF
congress by corporate bodies to repre-
sent them before the highest tribunal
in the nation is simply compliment
to their ability, and in no wise hamp-
ers or restricts them IN the advocacy
of the interests of the people In the
halls of legislation. Hon. Matt. Fl.
Carpenter, lifelong Republican, rep
the Democratic claims before
the electoral tribunal in 1876. He
did this as skillful lawyer, and in no
wise sacrificed his political principles.
Neither did Hon. George F. Edmunds
sacrifice the least interest of his con-
stituents by appearing in the supreme
court for railroad corporations, in mat.
ters different from those which the
public demand. The same may be
said of Senators Dolph and Mitchell.
In the article mentioned we clearly
stated our position. and did not think
there was any possibility of being mis-
understood. l.