The morning call., 1892-04-12
TRIBUTE TO BOSSES.
Buckley and Higgins Paid for
Political Services.
Perine Says They Received Two-Thirds Of
an Appropriation for Securing Its
Passage.

The hand Of the deposei boss" Buckley,
and the spirit of the dead other boss Hig-
gins. were connected yesterday rather un-
exp ectedly with the Subject-matter of con-
troYersy in the case of the Frear Stone
Company against y. Z. Perine to obtain an
accounting of what has been done with
money paid out in pursuance of legislative
act.
The case is on trial before Judge Hunt
and grows out of contracts made years ago
in connection with the asylum for insane at
Napa. Perine. the defendant. and the
witnesses thus lar examined for the plain
tiff aare directors and shareholders in the
Frear Stone Company, which ceased active
operation In January, 1871, but has never
been legally dissolved.
This company had profitable contracts to
build the Latham aud Safe Deposit Com
pany buildings and invested its earnings on
these contracts amounting tOtSome ST. COO,
in a considerable quantity of cement and
other material, which it had stored in its
yard, on Fourth ana BTannaD streets.
fire visited the premises in August, 1876
and in night all was swept away by the
flames.
The company had been "a very good
assessment paying concern" as one of the
directors put il, and when all its visible
assets were destroyed it was never deemed
advisable TO resume business. The insur-
ance money, amounting to about S5000 was
collected and some other outstanding
claims, and all known Liabilities against the
corporation, were discharged and the re-
malnder was divided at the rate Of ST per
share among the stockholders, who repre-
sented about 1000 shares.
AN OUTSTANDING ASSET
There was, however, one outstanding
asset-a claim for $1,000 to $4,000 against
the State Of California for statuary. granite
Work, labor and material furnished under
contract for the asylum building Great
difficulty was experienced on various techni-
cal grounds in realizing anything on this
claim, what with the commissioners pairing
down certain demands to keep within the
limits OF the appropriation and what with
others not having been presented in due
time. This claim was put down as a ques-
tiona0le one, to be realized only under a
special legislative appropriation. and then
not for the full amount claimed.
However, Perine, as the superintendent
OF the WI k prosecuted at Napa, was given
charge OF this matter TO prosecute it before
the Legislature, and at the session of 1859
a bli was passed appropriating S662I for
the work in question and paid 10 Perne
according to the letter of the bill. 1t is for
an accounting OF this money that the suit is,
Tor the testimony of his fellOw-directors
yesterday was that they had always under
stood that this money 30 appropriated was
IN payment OF the company'S claim for
which they as directors had so long waited
and that never before the filing of the
answer had they been given TO understand
otherwise.
1t was in connection with this feature of
the case that the ailusion 10 Buckley and
Higgins was made in the testimony Of G.
W. Beaver, the insurance man, who was
pres dent of the Freer Stone Company. He
declared that after the legislative appropria-
ton he had conversations with PeTine re-
garding the money and why ne had not
accounted for II to the company.
PAID TO HIGGINS AND BUCKLEY.
1t was then that he made the reply that
be had no money TO return 10 the company,
having had TO pay two-thrds of tile money
appropriation TO Buckley and Higgins to Sc
cure their political aid to have the act
passed and that each demanded aud re-
ceived one-third Of the total sum for such
services.
Ii was also given in testimony that at the
time OF the dividend of 81 per share Perine
receiving his share. he made no claim for
services against The company and in tie
various other conversations had since with
fellow-direciorS he had never urged one, and
ali illusions 10 the bill were understood To
cover the claim of the corporation and not
any private one OF the defendant. The
statements made By the defendant are i'm
poTtant In view OF the pieadings in his
answer.
He admits that the corporation had
claim of about $4,000 against the State for
| stone and granite work. labor and material
| on which 1t could not realize. and that after
! various efforts in its behalf to obtain the
! passage Of a special act to reimburse it, he
! gave up further attempts, when ii was
| made evident TO him that his fellow
| directors would not bear with him any
| share of the attendant expenses.
lie asserts then that helm person fand not
| the corporation had contracted to furnish
| certain granite work aud the six pieces of
| statuary, representing mythical female
| figures. aud that to pay for these IL was that
at the session Of lSS6-S9 the appropriation
was made, after his unremitting efforts in
prosecuting this claim at all legislative ses-
si0ns beginning with 1880. As an offset
| against the company he demands $1,000 for
expenses and loss Of time in lobbying its
original claim. $1,000 for money expended in
its behalf and $1,000 rs unpaid salary as
general manager.
All the witnesses were direct In their
testimony that the statuary was made un-
der a contract with the company and one
OF The witnesses even testified to having
gone TO the studio of Marion Wells, when
the carving was in progress. Much of the
testimony in the case is based, however. on
the recollection of the affairs of the cor
poration. it appearing that the records have
been destroyed.