The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1899-02-01
REPLY no MIR. rEAGAN.
on the subject of Contingent Fee

On the Subject of Contingent Fees
81: ,sos to Lawyers.
To the Editor of The Post.
Nacogdoches, Texas, January 20. Your
issue of January % contains an interview
with Hon. J. c. Fcagin of Livingston.
Texas, headed, Badly Needed Reforms. "
Apparently it seems to have bcep the in
tention of getting Mr.. Feaglns views on
the various legislative needs. Mr.. Feagln
confines himself In this interview to one
question alone requiring legislative at
tention, that of regulating lawyers and pro-
hibiting them from taking contingent fees
| in cases against corporations. To those
who do not know Mr. Feagins environ
ments, his statement would sound a little
| plausible, but to those who know that he
| is now and has been for some time the
attorney for a railroad company, his state
mcnts readily appear to have originated
In q biased mind. In the interview re-
ierred to 1t is said that he was a member
of the Twenty-second and TWENTY third
legislatures He claimed to be a lawyer
then-is 1t not strange then he did not then
press the reforms now desired? hut It
may be he WAS then on the other side
and could not see so clear: or It. may be
that We had no shystcr lawyers then. He
claims that II Is shown from the reports
that Texas has. more cases reported than
any other Southern State. and. as he
claims, this is brought about from "shys-
ter lawyers" taking railroad cases on con
tingent fees, II Is reasonable to conclude
that in his opinion Texas has more shys-
ter lawyers than any other Southern
State. His legislative remedy is to require
every lawyer who talEs case on a con
fq IN OF ar. he nsta
II he should make the pauper affidavit ana
should IL he shown that he has sworn
falsely, 10 have him dsharred. MIR. Feagin
knows that he or bis brother corporation
lawyers have tried through the courts
to force lawyers who took cases OH con-
tingent fee to give bond for the costs and
he knows the courts have decided against
II. Now they are up In arms and demand
ing that the legislature make statute
TO cover It, Watch and see IL some mem
bcr Of the legislature, who got there on n
pass, doesn't shove in bill OF this kind
in a few days. Let us see what the result
of a law of this kind would be: a mar
gets hurt from the negligence of railroad.
II hc Is financially we'll fixed. as Il mat.
ter of course. he cen employ a lawyer for
q stipulated fee, or oven II he gets one on
a contingent fee he Is able to give bond
for cost and can fight the company
through all the courts. Mr.. Feagn's law
would not touch him. Say the maa who
gets hurt has no money or property. the
railroad Will not settle with him. he Is I'M
able to fee lawyer or give bond for costa
and is SO badly injured that he is unable
TO work to procure funds for this purpose.
What then becomes OF the claim no has
against the company. Mr.. Feagin is not
then harassed with one more case and the
company Ia relieved OF the necessity OF
having to raise the freight rate In order
to tax the dear people to help pay ono
more judgment AGAINST Il. It would work
nicely for the COMPANY. 10 be sure.
Mr.. Feagin says this kind OF litigation
causes the corporations ito levy tribute
upon the people TO meet these extra ex-
pensos." Now this is indeed strong
proposition Let's see how II works; Take
as ain example the road for which ar
Fesgin works From the sworn statement
TO The railroad commission last wear II
paid Its expenses and paid about 6ia rcr
cent on $4,000 In bonds rer Elilc, Now IL
Is a conceded fact that this properly cost
tho present owners about sSoln per mile
So II Paid last year about 20 per seus on
its actual investment, II will necessarily