Los Angeles herald., 1892-11-07
M'LACHLAN'S REBUTTAL.
SUPPORTED BY AFFIDAvITs AND
CERTIFICATES.
Review OF the Charges Made Against
mis- Administration.
PART II.

To the people of Los Angeles county:
regret that l am again forced into
print to correct Misrepresentation by
Mr.. Dillon in reference to my record as
district attorney, and that what ought to
be a quiet and honorable contest, with
out personalities, should in any degree
seem to degenerate into a wrangle be-
tween candidates.
Prior to the publication of Mr.. Dillon's
speech at Downey 1 had never in any
manner whatever attacked or criticised
him, and when he uses that for an eX-
case for an assault upon me, he must
rest upon false information or his own
IMAGINATION. Ever since his attack on
me I have not referred to him except to
defend myself against unjust censure and
INSTRUMENTATION. If our contest has
the appearance of a apersonal controversy
between us the fault is not mine, as l am
simply defending my honor and reputa-
tion. / would much rather be defeated
than succeed by means of misstatements
or by misrepresenting my opponents
record or character in any way.
/ am glad to notice that Mr.. Dillon
practically admits that he misrepre-
sented me in his Downey speech, to
which have already replied, for in his
last statement he attempts to justify
bnt few of his former utterances, and |
regret that in that last statement he did
not say in as many words what the
tenor of his ''reioinder" implies, to-wit !;
that he was mistaken, for the most part,
in what he said about me in his Downey
speech.
EDGAR MOORE.
In the first place, desire to frankly
state that was mistaken in stating at
Whittier that Edgar Moore had made
an affidavit that when he gave the items
to Mr.. Dillon, making up the amount
alleged by Dillon to have been paid for
special counsel, he told Dillon that while
those sums were paid after l assumed
the duties of my office, yet they were
paid for services rendered prior to my
incumbency.
made this statement upon the state
ment of A. B. Lawson, who told me just
before took the train for Whittier to
speak that he had such an affidavit from
Mr.. Moore. l learned upon my return
that, while Mr.. Moore had promised to
give Mr.. Lawson such an affidavit. and
had requested Mr.. Lawson to prepare
the same for him to sign, when Mr..
Lawson presented the affidavit to Mr.
Moore the next day, MIR. Moore refused
to sign the paper, saying that Mr.. Dill
lion had paid him for his services and it
would not be right for him to sign the
affidavit. Mr.. Lawson assumed that
Moore would do as he agreed, and told
me what was not strictly correct; hence
the reason | made the statement
did at Whittier. l gladly make this
correction, though it was only tech
nical error, as the following affidavits of
Judge Silent and Mr.. Lawson show:
Estate OF CALIFORNIA, GO
County OF Los Angeles( '''
"Charlee Silent, being duly sworn,
says that he is an attorney -at-law, and
is acquainted with Expert Accountant
Edgar Moore; that heretofore and sub
seauent to the publication of II. G. Dill
Ions speech attacking Mr.. McLachlan's
administration, the said Edgar Moore
stated in The presence of atfiant that he
furnished Mr.. Dillon the amounts and
items paid out by the county during the
first year of Mr.. McLachlan's admins
tration, for special counsel, and that
when he handed the items to the said
Dillon he told him that while these
sums were paid by the county after MIR.
NcLachlan assumed the duties of the
Office, they were for services rendered
the county prior to Mr.. McLachlan's in
cumbency. CHARLES SILENT.
"Sworn to before me, this Sd day of
November, 1892. 7. II. WARD,
"By G. w. BELL, Deputy. Clerk
Estate OF CALIFORNIA, co
County of Los Angeles s''
ga. +. Laws T., being duly sworn.
saws that he resides in the city of Los
Angeles and is we'll acquainted with the
expert accountant, Edgar Moore that
subsequent to the delivery of H. G. Dill
Ions speech at Downey, deponent had a
conversation with said Edgar Moore in
which he told deponent that he fur
nished Mr.. Dillon the items making up
the amount paid out by the board ei
for special counsel during
the first year of Mr.. McLachlan's ad-
and that when he gave
Mr.. Dillon those items he told him that,
while those sums were paid after Mr..
McLschlan came into Office, they were
for services prior to Mr.. McLachlan's
incumbency; and the said Moore
then told deponent that he would
make an affidavit to that effect,
and said if deponent would prepare
such an affidavit he would sign and
swear to it; that deponent aiterward
prepared such an affidavit and presented
it to the said Moore for his signature,
but that the said Moore then told affiant
that Mr.. Dillon had paid him for his
services and that he did not think it
would be right under the circumstances,
to make any affidavit, but repeated
that while he did not want to sign the
affidavit, that what he had formerly
stated about the matter was correct.
ga. B. LAWSON.
"Sworn to before me this Sd day of
1891. 7. H. WARD, clerk.
"By G. w. BELL, deputy"
SPECIAL COUNSEL.
Mr.. Dillon made a grave mistake in
me with $247S96 for special
and puts new construction
upon the record that is again misleading
and untrue, in vain attempt to justify
his first statement. There is no dis
pute that that sum was paid for special
counsel after came into office, but the
truth is it was for services rendered be-
fore my incumbency, and J. am sorry
that MIR. Dillon seems to feel so bad
that this is so.
In his last statement he charges me
with new item OF $50 paid to s. M
White for eervicee as attorney for the
sherifi's office during the month of
March, 1891. If Mr.. Dillon had exam
ined this matter further, he would have
a lak Al, i