Los Angeles herald., 1892-10-30

convict and the board of supervisors ant
the trial judge recommended that
dismiss these cases, should have con
tinued to try them, spending thousandI
of dollars of the peoples money in tht
futile effort to convict?
FORFEITED BAIL.
The gentleman says that bail has beer
forfeited in four cases, but in one o.
them, All Tets case, the bail appear
to have been discharged by the blundeI
of the district attorney in remandine
the defendant to Jail while he was out
on bail. If Mr.. Dillon becomes district
attorney he will learn more about crimi-
nal law than his statements now indi-
cate, and among other things he will
learn that it is the court, and not the
district attorney, that remands prieon-
ers to jail, and if any mistake is made
in remanding any one to Jail it will not
be chargeable to him. But it will be
noticed that he does not say that
any mistake has been made in this
case; only that it appears" in his
vivid Imagination, to have been made.
l wonder why Mr.. Dillon, in giving to
the public the record" on these bail
bonds, did not state that / had collected
and placed in the treasury of this county
$2500 on these bonds, and that l have
obtained Judgment for $4,000 more,
acts that are without precedent in the
recent history of this county. AS to the
Ah Tet bond case, the record shows that
suit is pending, and that defendants de.
murrer to the complaint was overruled,
and that they have filed their answer.
CRIMINAL CASES.
But Mr.. Dillon's most glaring misrep-
resentation of my record is where he re-
fers to the number of criminal cases that
l have had to deal with. These are his
words: "During his term of Office to
date, Mr.. McLachlan and his 10 assist
ants have had the management of 276
criminal cases, big and little, being lees
than 13 cases per month, and less than
two cases per deputy per month"
Now, Mr.. Dillon says he is lawyer,
and that there are those who will say
that he is an honorable gentleman. He
knows where the record of the criminal
cases IL kept, and he knows, If he has
ever examined that record, instead of
my having had the management of but
276 criminal cases during my term, that
have had the management of over 1000
buCh Cd6Cbs w AaU SA0il L bdY Vi tlC III
dividual who will thus misrepresent the
record that he pretends to give in his
mad attempt to defeat the maker of that
record? Will even the honorable gen.
tlemen of this county, to whom, without
authority, Mr.. Dillon has referred the
public for certificate of character and
ability, approve of his plan of cam
paign?
NUMBER OF DEPUTIES.
Again, Mr.. Dillon in giving my record
says that have ten deputies. He says
he is lawyer. He knows, or should
know. where the record is kept. That
record shows that instead of having ten
deputies l have only six and all law
yers who are familiar with the Califor-
MIA laws of 1891, know that the district
attorney of this county can have but six
deputies, or, rather, one assistant and
five deputies; and Mr.. Dillon we'll
knows that Messrs. McComas, York,
Marble, Phibbs, Diehl, and Blades con-
stitute my full corps of deputies. 1t is
probable that his vivid imagination
classes the typewriter and a deputy
sheriff az district attorneys deputies.
but even then he falls two short of 10.
If Mr.. Dillon had fairly stated the facts,
he would have stated what the record
shows-that I have not only done the
business OF this county without the aid
of special council, but that I have done
the work with three less deputies than
my predecessor had.
RAILROAD TAX CASES.
Mr.. Dillon has also tried to convey the
impr ession to the public that 1 have
been culpably negligent in the manage
ment of the railroad tax cases. What
does the record show2 1t does not show
what Mr.. Dillon says it does. 1t does
not show that l promised to collect these
taxes when ran for Office two years ago.
never heard of these cases until about
two weeks after l assumed the duties of
my Office. About that time received
circular letter from the attorney gen.
eral, sent to the district attorney of
every county in the state through which
the Southern Pacific railroad passes, to
commence an action for the amount due
the state in their respective counties.
L am glad to be able to say that 1 was
commence these actions, which did
of them. The railroad filed
OCinuiiOi W hy COApioAAV, ntdo-
ing, among other things, that
the actions were barred by the statute
of limitations. Elaborate briefs were
prepared by both sides, and take pride
in being able to state that was also the
first district attorney in the state to Sc
cure ruling in these cases, which rul
ing secured last June in our superior
court, wherein Judge Wade decided that
the actions were not barred by the stat
ute of limitation, and directed the rail-
road company to answer our complaint.
Within the past few weeks the superior
court of San Francisco county has de-
cided the same point in these cases in
the same way.
The railroad company next answered
our complaint, and a few days ago we
got another ruling of the court, striking
out portion of their answer. This, in
brief, is the record of those cases. Any
fair-minded person can verify what say
by an examination of the records of our
court, for anyone, but Mr.. Dillon, will
there find that I have won every point
in these cases for the people, and that
every ruling thus far has been against
the railroad company.
But what will the people say of Mr..
Dillon? He says in his published
speech concerning these cases: "The
fact is they are lost," and he says the
bar took effect in 1890, before / became
district attorney. He says this in the
face of two decisions of the courts of our
state holding that they are not barred.
xryt1 hA ha oln ho