St. Paul daily globe., 1896-04-17
IN E. DARRAGH'S
COAT.
But SALARY ROLLS ARE PAID
Or VIII Be Within n Few Days nj
the Farthest Limit-Campaign
BuncOmbe.

sides which the city must pay 81, $50 statutory
costs incurred by the $50 suits brought
against the city by the policemen. In vent
ing their dissatisfaction with the final out
come of the long deadlock over the pay rolls,
| some of the assembymen roundly scored the
city's legal department, visiting upon the
| head of the corporation attorney the respon-
sibility for the expense incurred by the law
suits. The attorneys for the policemen were
| also criticised for bringing so many suits,
| and by the time every assemblyman had
spoke, save Reardon, it was generally ad-
mitted that everybody concerned was more
or less to blame for the business.
Mr.. Lewis led off with these inquiries:
why was 1t necessary for $50 policemen to
bring suit against the city, when one suit
would have suficed to settle the question
What excuse has any attorney who has the
interests Of this city at heart to file $50 suits
against the city and thereby saddle upon it
costs amounting to $1,000 or more? Heretofore
all attorneys appearing IN behalf of claimants
against the city have come before the coun-
Gil or a committee and presented their claims
or bills before beginning suit But they didn't t
do 1t in this case. Instead they rushed into
court, not with l, but with $50 suits. It's
shame that We have citizens in st. Paul
who will put the city in such a hole.
"And why didn't the corporation attorney
give us some timely advice in this matter? {?
Isn't 1t strange that the corporation attorney
never heard that the suits were to be brought :?
say, isn't it strange? It's shame and it's
unfair
]. c. Michael. of Michael & PEBBLES, the
attorneys for the policemen, listened with
calm and imperturbed demeanor to the crit
icism of Mr.. Lewis. At its conclusion, being
permitted to reply, Mr.. Michael said:
II agree with Mr.. Lewis that this whole
proceeding Is wrong. 1t is wrong to compel
$50 men to work for three months in cold
winter, and then keep them out of their pay,
SO they are obliged to borrow money at a
high rate Of interest to provide food and
clothing for themselves and families. AS to
the criticism Of their attorneys, personally, I
do not mind 1t. but as far as bringing these
suits is concerned have this to say. The
two bodies of the common council tied up
the salaries for three months in a deadlock.
There was no apparent hope of relief. The
policemen came to US and asked what they
should do They were advised that one Of
them should bring a suit. But they said
no to this proposition, as they were sure
that in that case only one policeman would
secure a judgment and he only would be
paid, while the 149 others would be no better
off than before, which statement, I believe,
represented the facts. Hence to obtain sub
stantial relief there was nothing left but to
bring a suit for each man.
cat the last meeting of this body, just
after the suits had been begun, stated that
if the matter was settled at that stage of
the proceedings, the costs incurred would
amount to only $780, but you paid no at
tention to my proposition, and proceeded to
pass an ordinance which purported to fix
the salaries at the reduced figures to take
effect Jan. 1 Of this year. This the council
could not do and you were advised that a
retroactive measure of that kind would not
be acceptable. Something was said about a
committee comforting with me in the near
future, but no committee ever notified me
that 1t desired a conference. nor was any
such committee appointed. I assure you that
We have not acted in bad faith, and l ann
content to stand any criticism that may be
visited on my head"
Then Mr.. Parker stirred up the legal de-
partment. He asked Mr.. Michael if he had
conversed with Corporation Attorney Dar-
ragh prior to filing the suits. Mr.. Michael
answered that he had suggested that the
policemen call on the city attorney. but
could not remember whether he had per-
sonally seen Mr.. Darragh or not after that
| and prior to the filing Of the suits. There
upon Mr.. Parker opened out on the city at
| torney in this fashion:
"Pd like to know what the corporation at
tcrneys office Is for if not to advise this coun-
| Gil. If the legal department had done it's duty.
| it would have advised the council that the
| city had no defense, and this would have
| saved the city the expense it has been put
| to. 1 think the corporation attorney is en-
tirely at fault, clearly in the wrong. He
! did not give proper attention to this matter.
| AS for Mr.. Michael, he does not deserve any
criticism. He simply did his duty as an at
torney.''
Mr.. Darragh did not lose any time getting
| on his feet. In tones that betrayed consid-
cradle resentment, he denied that he or his
department were responsible for the police
mems law suits. He also, with sarcastic en-
phasis, deplored the fact that a municipal
campaign was on. Doubtless that explained
the attack upon him. He insisted that it was
the sole duty of the legal department to de-
| fend suits against the city. 1t could not be
expected to prevent them. Neither was 1t his
duty to dictate to the council what 1t should
or should not do. Mr.. Parker and the rest
| of the council knew well enough how Judge
Kerr ruled in a previous suit Of the same
| character.
Mr.. Arosin then Clipped in with this COM
| prehensive statement Of his estimate of the
citys legal department.: 81 claim, Mr.. Presi-
| dent that an opinion from the corporation
| attorneys office is not worth the paper 1t is
| written on" and Mr.. Arosin appropriately
snapped his fingers on the word "paper' tc
intensity his emphasis.
THANK you,' responded Mr. Darragh.
Mr.. Strouse then arose and remarked
| with calm deliberation, 'I think this body
| is as much to blame as the legal depart.
| ment."
| Assistant Corporation Attorney Phillips
next craved permission to explain It wa:
granted, and Mr.. Phillips reviewed the whole
situation, and demonstrated that had al
the legal phases been laid before the assem-.
bly, last January, it would not, at that time
have passed pay rolls made out for the unre
duced salaries.
Messrs. Robb and Van Slyke defended the
corporation attorney against the criticisms
of Mr.. Lewis and Mr.. Parker. Mr.. johnson
was disposed to be lenient though he though
| that little more advice from the legal de-
partment would not have been amiss, and Mr.
| Lewis closed the discussion by admitting tha
| possibly everybody concerned ought to shar,
a little Of the blame. Then the assembl,
passed the January and February pay rolls
The March pay roll has not been sent in a.
yet. ~~
The assembly did not take any action OF
the proposed ordinance vacating a portion O
Summit avenue, in Desnoyer park, 100 fee
in width and 1,200 feet long, except to re
commit it to the committee on streets. Mr.
Lewis stated the reasons why q majority O
the committee voted not to recommend tn,
passage of the ordinance. They deemed i
wiser not to give away the city's right o
way over the property in question for suel
a sum as $50, but preferred to compel tn,
United States government to institute con
demnation proceedings, If 1t must acquir,
possession Of the land. Mr.. Lewis also point
| ed out the superior facilities offered by th,
F-lann for boulevard purposes, and argHed- tina
the council ought not to vote away what wa
| doubtless valuable right. For his part b.