Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1893-06-15


the county commissioners the following
letter, regarding fees retained by him:
Aberdeen, WASH, June z, 1898.
To the Commissioners of Chehalis coun-
ty, State of Washington.
Gentlemen "A certified copy of your
order directing me $40 pay over to the
Treasurer of Chehalis county all fees by
him (me) collected upon delinquent tax
cases for the years 1880 to 1890 inclusive,
amounting to the sum of one thousand
one hundred and eighty dollars ($11S0.0O)
the same being the amount due the
county as per his (my) report of January
9th, 1898, received"
In reply say, the fees you refer to are
the counsel fees fixed by the court in
each case, and in my Judgment the'coun-
ty has no legal or equitable right, title
or interest in or to them whatsoever.
The county has received, as shown by
my report of January 8, 1898, in each
delinquent tax case collected, all the tax,
penalty, interest and cost To what
more is she honestly entitled?
No, gentlemen, if the prosecuting at
torney is not entitled to the fee on ac-
count of extra work and labor imposed
upon him in the collection of ten years
delinquent taxes, the county should not
be, but the fees should 90 back to the
parties who paid them, for they have
paid the county all that was due it, and
the counsel fee is extra. But you will
say that the Fee and Salary bill gives
the fees to the county. Let us see: The
same legislature that passed the Fee
and Salary law, also, passed the Revenue
law, and the Fee and Salary law was
passed month prior to the Revenue
law. When the legislature made the
Revenue law they proposed to sweep up
and clean up the Territorial floor of all
delinquent taxes up to and including the
year 1890. They saw that this would
impose extra work and labor upon the
prosecuting attorneys that was not con-
ttemplateed when they passed the Fee and
Salary law. Thus in addition to the
salary, for compensation for the extra
work and labor imposed upon the prose-
cutting attorneys by the revenue law, the
legislature placed in said law ga reason
able counsel fee to be fixed by the court"
But, gentlemen, do not wish to argue
this question for l understand there is a
case now pending in the Supreme court
that will determine the whole matter.
Will only say, that out of the counsel
fees, paid my deputy and clerks and
hold their receipts, and if the Supreme
court holds that the county is entitled to
said ices, am ready to settle any time,
Your obedient servant,
j. @. PEARSON,
Ex-Prosecuting Attorney of Chehalis Co.
This is, no doubt, putting the case in
the best possible light from the attor-
neys' point of view; but what bad light
at its bestl While mot questioning the
sincerity OF the attorneys reasons, as
given above, for not complying with the
order OF the board Of commissioners, still
they seem trivial in the extreme. 1t
would have been far better had he really
contented himself with the statement
that he did not propose to argue the ques-
ton; but would await and obey the opin-
ion OF the supreme court.
There can be no doubt additional du-
ties were imposed upon the prosecuting
attorney by the revenue law; but they
were nothing like as onerous as those i'm
posed upon the county treasurer. Yet
what would we have thought of the coun-
ty treasurer had he appropriated to his
own use the fees allowed him by the
same law? The same remark applies to
county clerk. who is, also, allowed fees
under this law. Why should the attor-
ney pocket fees allowed by the court as
counsel fees when the county clerk and
county treasurer are compelled to turn
clerks fees and treasurer's fees over to
the county? Why, if the county attor-
ney is not entitled to the fees, should
they revert to the people any more than
the clerks fees or treasurer's fees? All
other county officers are compelled by
law to turn over to the county all mon
eys collected, and call moneys collected"
with them means fees as well as all 9TH
er moneys. Why does not the same
reasoning apply to the county attorney,
when the law says, "Said county attorney
shall pay quarterly to the county treasur-
err all moneys by him collected?"
We are glad, however, to have this
statement from Ex-County Attorney
Pearson, and glad to give it publicity;
but we are still more anxious to hear
from the present county attorney, Geo.
d. Schofield. The people of this county
are on the tip-toe of expectation to learn
from him how he could between the first
OF JANUARY and the first Of April collect
for. the county $7,10066, and pocket of
that sum IS, 105.00 for fees, in addition to
his salary.
Mr.. Schofeld is young man with am
billions and abilities. He had bright
political future before him. From now
henceforward he will be as dead polite
ally as a ward politician OF the time of
the Pharaohs.