The San Francisco call., 1896-10-30

the action taken by the American Railwa
Union at meeting held yesterday, explains
ITSELF. Knowing that you have always stood
in this community for law and order respect
fully ask that you take this matter up and
make such defense of me as You see fl for hay-
ing fully discharged the duties OF my profess
sion. | am confident that the citizens in this
community who favor law and order will not
permit all organization, which attempts to
indorse such an assassination as was COM
mitted at Woodland OF an innocent engineer,
and United States soldiers performing their
duty, to defeat a candidate, objected to solely
because of his having performed his duty
under his sworn oath as an attorney and
counselor-at-law.
In the railway strike cases tried at Wood
land in 1894 Judge J. W. Armstrong of Sacra-
mento WAS employed bY and represented the
Southern Pacific Company, Mr.. Hatch ap-
peared as District Attorney, and l was en-
ployed and appeared on behalf of the Brother
hood OF Locomotive Engineers Ia railway en-
ployes' organization) to which Samuel Clark,
the engineer who was killed, belonged.
In those cases permitted no injustice to be
done any one. Newspaper articles containing
my argument and showing my conduct in the
trial OF the cases will fully bear out in this.
The defendants, and each and every one OF
them, at the conclusion of each trial thanked
me for the fair and impartial manner in which
l had prosecuted the cases. / allowed no I'M
proper evidence to be introduced and tried
the cases strictly upon legal evidence with the
result that S. d. Worden was convicted and his
conviction subsequently sustained by the
Supreme Court of the State.
The morning papers of July 10, 1894 (FHE
CALL in particular and the sacramento Bee)
give an account of the commencement OF pro-
ceedings at Woodland and show clearly that
appeared in those eases as a representative, not
of The Southern Pacific Company, but OF The
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers +. v.
Meyers, chairman OF that organization, who
resides in this City, at 33S Capp street, VIII
fully bear me out in this assertion. In the
newspapers OF that date, and especially In the
Sacramento Bee, will be found my argument
at the preliminary examination. wherein L
differed with other counsel VINO were asso-
clated with me in prosecuting the case; ana,
although contending that the defendants &C
cused should be held TO answer, repudlated
the contention of other counsel in the case
that every member of the American Railway
- - CARROLL COOK.
The following is corroborative:
SAN Francisco, Oct. %, 1896.
Carroll Cook, Attorney at Ldl0-DEAR SIR; i
have your request OF even date, viz: That
procure for you copy of the resolution OF
subdivision No. 2S3, Brotherhood of Locomo-
tive Engineers, authorizing your employment
as special counsel to represent the said bdi-
vision in the prosecution of those who were
responsible for the derailment of the passen-
ger train at trestle two miles west OF Sacra-
mento, on July IL. 1894, which derallment
resulted in the death OF Engineer Sam Clark, q
member of the subdivision named.
have taken steps to procure the copy asked
for, and soon IS it is 1t hand will forward II
to you.
In this connection I will add that, being
one who, in connection with committee OF
two of the members of Leland Stanford Divi-
sion No. 2S3, opened the negotiations between
you and the subdivision, that resulted in your
employment as special counsel as named
above, am in position TO say that, as such
special counsel, you acted as the representa-
tive only of the subdivision named One OF its
members had been murdered, ana it was the
desire of the subdivision, while laying not one
fingers weight on any innocent man, to do ell
possible TO bring those who were guilty to
justice. Hence your employment. Yours
truly, +. V. MEYERS,
Chairman. G. C. A.. B. L. E., s. P. System.