Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1893-08-03
THOSE ATTORNEYS FEES AGAIN.


1t is certainly remarkable that the pre-
sent board of county commissioners
agreed with the county attorney and ex-
county attorney upon the statement of
facts in the matter of attorneys fees in
DELINQUENT tax cases, without having the
county represented by any other lawyer
than the county attorney, who also APP
peared as attorney for himself. Common
decency, as we'll as professional etiquette,
should have compelled the two lawyers
to suggest the propriety of calling in other
professional aid; but with such game
as they were about to play, that, perhaps,
was not desirable. How we'll they finess-
ed the trick appears, we think, from
the following part OF the so-called state
ment of facts -
WHEREAs-The prosecuting attorneys
in making reports to the county treasurer
for moneys collected in said causes have
paid and accounted for to said treasurer
the tax, penalty, interest, costs and ex-
penses in each of said causes, but have
retained the counsel fee in each case as
fixed by the court, claiming such fee as
compensation for extra work in the fore
closure of said tax cases.
This is not statement OF the facts, but
a mis-statement OF them upon the vital
pointthe tax payers wished passed upon.
To base decision on such statement,
and of course the attorneys knew perfect
ly well the court could not go outside of
the record, is to perpetuatea falsehood.
With such a statement of the case,
they ask the court to pass upon the fol-
lowing points,
Fourth-Delinquent tax cases properly
commenced and prosecuted to final judg-
ment and the county of Chehalis becom-
ing the purchaser at such tax sales, no
person appearing to bid on the lands, and
the county bidding the amount of the
judgment and costs, including an attor-
ney's fee fixed by the court, and accept
ing certificate Of purchase for the lands
bid in at such tax sales, and recording
such certificate with the auditor of said
county.
Fifth-If said prosecuting attorneys
are entitled to such counsel fees mention
in said fourth class Of cases, are they au-
thorized in making report to the county
treasurer to retain such counsel fees from
moneys in their hands collected in other
tax causes of the same series? If they
are not so authorized, and such fees be-
long to such attorneys, how should they
be paid?
1t should be well observed that they
have never once said, or made the state
ment of fact, that the prosecuting attor-
neys have retained attorneys fees from
moneys in their hands collected in other
causes, in the same or different series.
On the contrary, the statement is most
emphatically made that the attorneys
"have paid and accounted for to said
treasurer the tax, penalty, interest, costs
and expenses in each of said causes, but
have retained the counsel fee in each
CASE"
How can that be true, and the tax,
penalty, interest, cost and expenses IN
certain cases amount to-according to the
county attorneys own report-$7, 100.66;
his claimed fees, in the same cases,
amount to 1852; and yet he turn over to
the county treasurer $1995.66, instead of
$5446 .66, the real tax, penalty, interest,
cost and expense?
This is where the attorneys got the
better of the commissioners in the pre-
paration Of the statement OF facts. The
record has been so made up that there is
little hope for the county.
In other respects the statement seems
fair enough but the commissioners can
not afford to have the court pass on this
point upon such mis-statement Of facts.
They should at once ask leave of the
court to withdraw it and agree upon a
correct statement, or else begin an action
against the attorneys. Otherwise the
people must hold them responsible.