The morning call., 1893-02-21

Donald Theodore Reichert. j. w. Anderson, A.
j. Johnson George Z. Pratt.
Higgins was eross-examined by General
Barnes, who asked him if he was the author
OF the petition. He replied that he was.
barnes then wanted to know il he thought
that LAWSON lacked fair education and the
proper legal attainments The witness diu
not like to swear as to that. but as TO Lay
sons being disceurteous and unelyil ne was
free to say that be was all of that and
more de also testified that there had been
many complaints made to his office ABOUT
the impossibillty OF getting any information
out of Deputy Layson.
7 w. Anderson, Superintendent of Pub
lie Instruction, was next called. lie was
asked by Devlin what experience he had
with Deputy Layson. His reply was that
he had been given altogether too much
physical exercise in trying 10 find LAWSON
In his Office TO suit his health. 1t was hard
work climbing two flights of stairs in vain
effort TO discover Layson at his post OF
duty He thought that at least two-thrds
OF the time he had found Layson out. and
upon one occasion there was the following
placard upon the door: "Offiee TO let. Fix
lures for sale" Hs considered the sign
quite appropriate.
Professor Anderson was asked if LAWSON
had ever furnished him with any opinions.
The way it usually was" said Anderson.
II wrote the opinion and Layson agreed
with me. The conversation between US
would be something like this: l would sub
nit proposition to him and he would ask
me what | thought about it. When had
told him be would reply: i guess that is
bout right.
Deylin-Did he ever render you an opin-
Jon about your salary as secretary OF the
board of trustees of the State Normal
School?
Anderson-Yes. About eight months
ago he told me was entitled to pay accord
ing to law.
Devlin-Have you received any other opin-
ion on that subject since?
Anderson-Yes. This morning I found
an opinion from him tucked under my
to the salary.
THAT was rendered since be knew You
were going to testify against him in this
case. was it nOt?"
Yes"
State Controller E. P. Colgan was the next
witness called. He said he believed he as
justified in signing the petition against Lay
son. While, as a general proposition. he
had no serious complaints to make against
Hart he was of the opinion that the office
was in incompetent hands when Hart was
out of town.
State Treasurer Mcdonald was called
and said that his experience with the
Attorney Generals chief deputy had not
been satisfactory, and Secretary Waite
testified that he would not take LaysOn's
opinion when il conflicted with his own.
George +. Pratt, secretary of the State
Board of Examiners. went further than
either of them and declared that the
reason why he did not go TO Layson for
opinions was because he did not consider
them of any account. He also said that In
the greatest number OF instances when he
called at the Attorney Generals Office he
could not get In. His relations, however,
with the Attorney General had always
been pleasant When asked the direct
question as TO what he thought of Lsyson's
ability. he replied that so far as his Office
was concerned he considered him per-
fectly useless.
State Printer A. j. johnson said that the
only opinion lie ever got from Layson the
State Controller refused TO accept.
Layson was called to the stand He had
been worked up TO a very high pitch of
anger and when asked if he did not spend q
great deal of his time in attending to private
cases he replied that he had had eight or
nine suits in which the State was not in
terested
Devlin asked him il he had not charged
the exorbitant sum Of $500 for his work
in case in which the State Agricultural
Society was interested. He replied that he
had.
Devlin-Did they pay you that amount?
Layson-No. The Shylocks (meanng the
members of the Agricultural Society cut it
down.
The witness then gave his temper a loose
rein and spoke of all the State officers who
had signed the petition to have him removed
as YahOos and blaekmailers.
LaysOn was then asked by Devlin about
a suit he had been engineering for
the Attorney Generals office directed
against Mrs. D. r. Ingham of Sacramento.
The witness was shown three letters writ
ten to this lady by himself. They were
upon The letterheads Of the Attorney
General and we're written by a typewriter
He ACKNOWLEDGED that he was the author of
them. but denied tbat.one of them contained
threat that unless Mrs. Ingham called at
the Attorney Generals Office at once and
settled with him she would get into trouble
He said that it was not so intended.
The witness then tried to explain to the
committee that the case was charity one,
but Chairman Mathews shut him off per-
emptOrlly ON any explanation OF that char
acter and pinned him down to the question
as 10 whether or not the paper upon which
the letters were written belonged to the
State. and whether or not one of them had
not been delivered by the State porter.
Layson again endeayOred to fghtaway from
answering the question. and tried hard tc
expatiate at great length upon the philan.
thropic motives which actuated him in
bringing the suit; but Mathews, not being
in a sentimental mood. insisted upon him
answering He finally admitted that the
paper, his time and that Of the porter be.
longed to the State. This admission seemed
to be all that Mathews required of him, and
he was allowed to 60.
The committee then adjourned to meet In
San Francisco tomorrow morning, at II
O'CLOCK, In the rooms of the Election Com.
missioners in the new City Hall.
There are more than a hundred witnesse:
to be examined, and many think that pros
poets are poor Of the committee being able &c
report in time for impeachment proceeding:
before time for adjournment. should the
committee recommend them.
BROKE JAIL AND FLED.
Murderer and Horseff,ief Escapf