The daily tribune., 1905-03-31
BUSINESS tn CITY
MANAGEMEN 1T

you. Ny candid judgment is that can
win this case. There are reasons iu the
record. had tho first verdict SGT aside
as not warranted by the evidence. In
no other case had you ever been 90 for
tunate. Tho record verdict Is not war
ranted either. Tho verdict is No. 6O2.
Voucher No. -, May 8. 1900, shows that
in Mr.. Champions cases you paid tS.Oo4
to satisfy the Judgments alone, say moth
ing Of costs and attorneys fees, both to
Mr.. Champion and to Mr.. Maupin. I
am not complaining of those fees how
ever. They did their work and should
BE- paid. But the gentlemen have spent
much time and talk also because Mr..
Maupin was employed to assist me.
Look here, do you know that Mr.. Mau-
pin has been employed in every Newland
creek water case you ever had? Why
did our then mayor, p T. Mcclure, who
verified all your pleadings as mayor.
have him employeds III tell you the
reason. Juries were selected from tax
payers. Most jurors in this county are
from Florence and Canon. Florence is
party to the suit. The opposing attor-
ney is Canon City man. When we
call jurors Florence men are excused; be-
ing tax payers here an adverse judg-
ment would fall upon their property 30
they are let out. You can't get Florence
jurors on. Much depends on iuries. In
law suit lawyers checkmate each other
on juries by bringing lawyer into the
case from the locality of the jurors. This
because We all select jurors best II We
know the men and Canon City lawyer
knows jurors there better than an out
slider. He has more influences over
them. These reasons together with Mr..
Maupin's acknowledged abilities caused
his selection in Mr.. Champions cases,
and say, he selected wisely. He cer
tainly thinks so too. NOW IF HE
SELECTED WISELY HOW DOES
HE ARGUE THAT l DID NOT
WHEN 1 DID THE SAME THING!
selected Mr.. Maupin for the same
reason and one other, namely,-that
his knowledge and experience
in the Smith 4 Wasmuth
oases gave you the advantage Of his
experience since all thoss cases are
alike; they are 20 much alike Indeed
that the answers made BY Mr.. Cham
pion and Mr.. Maupin In both Of those
cases. were, over my objection in
troduced in evidence By plaintiff In
the Calmet case, to show, that Flor
encs took the same position In those
cases ~ 1t did In this. and that these
1uries found . verdict adverse to
FlorenDe and counsel % arossd his
case to the jury with sophasis.
It was error in ny judgment, 70
allow those plsadipgs 10 70 IN bat
courts judges and lawyers can only
object when overruled. Thoss, are
ths facts.
Bat yoa Alse complain q the oest
800 70 Mr.. Aanpis. feel Il sspro-
fssssesal 70 notice saob. Your spas-
oil by snaninoss vote. xf. Thomas
Blsnt. included, endorsed The employ.
nest q Mr.. Aaspin an1 pAsssA
snauiaoeslly The molten allowing
his tees bs6oss b diA The work just
y thsy did when Mr.. Maspts W. ~.
ploysd With Mr.. Uhanpios. ed yoss
rsoosds chow that March Is. 1see. NJ.
Aauan vas pasd $50 Tor ess OF thoss
eases assisting Nr. Chaopion aad
Jsss !, 1900. esso tes ssothsR aasist-
Ing hin. also. bssides . warrant wss
also drawn 70 cover the disosunt On
bis warrants. There was, two trials
eco fees plus disoosnt TO xr. Haspin
alona ethics detsrs me from msosion
Of Mr.. Champions fees. The Oalmss
oase was two trials 1900 nrst ess and
l
oio0 &C -ond fss. and paid In city waf-
Fants Mr.. Asspin stood tbs dtscount; (;
Asure Il IL POI, can't o6 lssvss esss nst
for tve trials aGainst Zoo net whss
working With NJ. Champioo. Thsss
eestism men through Mf Moors's Dapor
~ thas Mr.. Msspin ed I were part.
4 all the bsps6s. Yoa hsvs it; the
difference 70 Mr.. Asspis bstwssa
os4S With me- and eco pst with Mr..
Champioa. That 10 the whole quss-
sion. I used my best Judgment In tie
matter. your city eosbcil endorssd
the sslsctioa and votsA Ne psies. II