The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-11-01
Editor of The Tribune.

Court Before Being Paid.
Editor of The Tribune
Sir. Permit me a little space in which
| to reply to an article in yesterdays
Times, headed "Vosburg City Solicitor
Partner Dawson Referee" Were 1t not
a most unjust. scurrilous, malignant
defamatory and false statement of the
facts. uttered on the eve of an election
| solely for the purpose of injurins Judge
| Vosburg politically. / would not take
| the pains to reply to it. or allow myself
| to come within the radius of the con-
| tamination of the skunk who wrote it.
Yet feeling that some might desire to
| have the slander so unjustly voiced
against him refuted, l hasten to the
| task with this apology.
| | take it that when Il man has lived
lifetime in a community, practiced
| actively at the bar for twenty years.
held offices of trust and of great re-
sponsiblity, with the eye of the publ I
continuously upon him, l say unde
these conditions, if a character wer
soled and corrupt, some deep stain OF
blistering scar could be found upon it
without resortng in attack to what is
apparent TO all as the sheerest nom
sense, actuated by Il malicious desire to
injure him with the voters. a shot that,
in my humble opinion, will fall far
short of its mark.
The maker of the article referred to
shows his venom and spleen when he
charges Judge Vosburg with the vile,
awful and henous crime of being a
"persistent advertiser" of "liking to
see his name in print" of preparing
good newspaper copies of everything he
has occasion to do of being "a fawn-
ing creature of Connell,' etc. How this
lawyer knows that Judge Nosburg
likes to see his name in print I do
not know, but. at any rate, it is an
awful thing and imprisonment at hard
labor and solitary confinement We're a
mild punishment for it.
The other charge. of "looting the
| county treasury is more malicious
when the facts are known, and more
| malicious because the charge is of a
graver nature and the facts placed in
a light to deceive Let the facts speak:
| The cases mentioned in this article
We're referred to me when A A. VOs-
burg was city solicitor, by agreement
of counsel for the plaintiff and for the
defendant, with the approval of one of
the judges of this county. I understand
these cases We're all referred to me by
| request of the attorneys who repre-
sented the several plaintiffs, and never
by any request or suggestion on behalf
of Mr.. Nosburg. In the same way other
cases of q like nature were referred to
c. b. Gardner, p w. Gallagher, and
other attorneys of this bar. 1t is not
true that the city solicitor was directed
to confess Judgment in these cases. On
the contrary, he was authorized to con-
fess Judgment in the sewer cases of
Donohue & O'Boyle. These cases arose
by reason of contract of Donohue &;
O'Boyle with the city of Scranton to
| sewer one of the streets of the South
Side. When part of the work was done,
they demanded pay of the city, pursu-
ant to contract. This the city could not
do, having no money in the treasury.
Donohue & O'Boyle needed their money
to carry on the enterprise and so their
attorney, NJ. j. Donohue, esq, informed
the city solicitor that since the CITY
could not pay, they must get the money
elsewhere. He also stated that the
banks would not purchase a confessed
Judgment, and he wished the cases re-
felTed, in order that judgments could
be obtained satisfactory to the banks
which We're to purchase them. AS there
was no city funds, it was the duty OF
the city solicitor to do what he could
to enable these contractors to negoti-
ate their judgments and pay their men.
The cases We're referred, at the request
of NJ. j. Donohue, esq. attorney for the
plaintiff, with the approval of the court,
to me. Hence the first hue and cry.
The other suits We're for receivers
bills. approved by the court and by the
joint auditing committee of the coun-
ellis. The treasury of the city was still
empty. These plaintiffs had had their
fees fixed by the court and ordered
paid by the councils, and now desired
their money. What was the city soli-
ctor to do" Confess judgments? but
the banks would not purchase such
judgments, and again, the city solicitor
had not been authorized to confess
judgments in these cases. AS the best
way to assist the several plaintiffs and
still protect the city's interests, at the
request of their attorneys, these cases
were referred. There was no addition
al burden imposed upon the county, as
the cost of a jury trial would have
been far more than a referees bill and
the city was saved much cost by this
proceeding as the plaintiffs would have
arbitrated the cases if they had not
been referred.
The testimony of witnesses was taken
in each case in shorthand and tram
scribed, and report was prepared and
filed. The referees fees were very
moderate and reasonable for the work
done. These bills of the referee were
certified to by the several attorneys
in the case, some of them were ap-
proved by the Hon Henry A. Knapp,
county solicitor, and some by II. l..
Taylor his successor as county soici-
tor The evidence and referees reports
in these cases Were examined and the
bills of the referee ordered paid by
either of Judges tR. w. Archibald, Fred
w. Gunster, H. NJ. Edwards or John
+. Kelly. The sterling honesty and up
rightness of character of these men
ought to be a sufficient guaranty that
the treasury of the county was not
"looted" by Judge Vosburg or myself
and that those bills were correct and
valid. Was there fraud or theft in so
referring cases and securing judgments
against the city as the lawyer" con-
tends. Then must the plaintiffs be
guilty. Still will any one think for an
instant that Messrs. Barrett and Jordan
of the Truth" ID, j. CamDbell iury