Las Vegas daily optic. [volume] (Las Vegas, N.M.) 1880-1908, 1896-06-10

In the case o.; the City Of East Las We.
gas against William Wells, in which Wells
was sued for one dollar poll tax-which
means road tax-City Attorney E. V. Long
appeared for the city and Bernard Daily
FOR Wells. Attorney Daily, fearing that
the old, august judge might be prejudiced
in favor of hay ing people pay their poll
tax, concluded to have a jury, to sit in the
case; whereupon A. d. Higgins. John
| Chapman, Trad Cochran, Chas. NV. An
derson, P. G. Hogsett and Lew Henson
were selected as jurymen. After the pros
| ecution had proved that the defendant had
| not paid his tax, as ordinance No. 70 re-
| quires, Attorney Daily set mp a reason, for
the defense, that because some other tax
payers had not paid their tax, his clisnt
| should not do so. He then proceeded to
arraign the city officials for not paying
their taxes, and for borrowing money to
pay other peoples debts. instead of max
ing everybody pay up, and save the neces-
sity of having to pay interest
Al this stage Of the game, Judge Long
was charged as being a delinquent, on
his horse and buggy tax, by Attorney Dali
", and he Daily thought that Long
should pay his tax. before forcing others
to pay; whereupon, the judge proposed to
pay his tax If the blonde attorney would pay
his. Whereupon, each planked up the cash
for their individual tax. And still the
blonde attorney continued to comment up
on the shortcomings of the city officials,
from the city marshal up to mayor, all the
time creating much amusement in the
lobby.
The attorney from the Wabash bottoms
first addressed the jury, in the meantime
berating his opponent as being a confirmed
''crank, "and not satisfied with anything, not
even with himself. Whereupon the blonde
attorney set up the plea to the jury, that
he did not believe any sane man had told
the Indiana man any such thing, and then
made the plea that his friend Wells was
the victim Of malicious prosecution, and
that the two we're made the subjects OF
acton because they were poor and not able
to defend themselves. The case was then
submitted to the jury, who soon returned
the following verdict:
We the jury find for the plaintiff, and
against the defendant William Wells, and
assess the damage at one dollar. Where
upon the court entered up judgment
against the defendant for the one dollar
and the cost of this action taxed at $s.75,
and that the defendant stand committed
until said fine and cost be paid.
Section six, OF ordinance No. rs. says:
of any person liable to pay the tax or per.
form the labor under the provision of this |
ordinance. shall fail to pay such Tax or
perform the labor, after publication Of
notice as horeinbefore provided, he shall
be punished by a fine of not less than two
dollars nor more than ten dollars and the |
cost of the prosecution, or by imprison-
ment in the county Jail or city prison for a
period of not less than two days nor more
than ten days, or by both such fine and i'm
in the discretion Of the court"
All this just simply means that all those
who do not pay their poll tax In cash ,or
labor, will have to come up to the "cap.
office and s~ettle," with the cost and
The prison attachment, il necessary.
birds that can sing and will not sing,
must be made to sing"