The Montgomery advertiser., 1905-11-25
ATTORNEY NOT REMOVED
tContinued from Page 1.)

NN----~>> ~1SA@- - NBN "
 Washington to the effect lhat I had been removed as Assistant~United States Attorney for irregularities in my accounts.
 T am in receipt of a telegram from Attorney-General Moody, November 2i, 1905, stating, in substance, I had been suspended as special assistant, pending explanation of drawing salary as a regular assistant since my appoint ment as special assistant.
 The question between the Depart ment and myself is not one of 'ac- counts but one of construction of con- tracts; whether I am entitled to draw two salaries, one for my special ser vices as a special assistant. the other for my services as a regular assistant United States attorney. hold two unequivocal commissions, ore as regular assistant, the other as spe- cial assistant, The duties of these two offices are entirely different. One calls for the regular routine work of an as- sistant. whiee the other calls for special work, original investigations of peon- age and whitecapping complaints, which work had heretofore been done by two deputy marshals.
 "Iu the latter part of February 1905, the President addressed 8 letter to the Attorney General indicating a desire that somethinw he done for me. Tn March 1905, made application to the Department for appointment as a spe- cial assistant in certain peonage ana whitecapping cases. and enclosed copy of the Presidents letter. On April ', 1905, the Department appointed me spe- cial assistant, and I forwarded my oath of office on April 10 1905. It did not call on me to resign my offioe as regu- lar assistant as 1t had done before when T An cnarial aGatefant in l0U3. nor did the Department dispense with my services in that capacity-l, there- fore continued as regular assistant un- der my commission and oath as sucn.
 "The Department corresponded with me from month to month, after Aprll 1905, in my capacity as regular as sistant. It forwarded me vouchers or receipts each month for about eighth months, beginning about April 22,, 1905, covering my salary under my commis- sion as a regular assistant; It wrote me letters addressed to me as regu- lar assistant United States Attorney The checks covering my salary for this service were enclosed in letters to me as Assistant United States Attorney and used the language being the amount of your salary for October 1905.' The blank receipts sent me by the Department read about as follows;
 Received of A. c. Caine. Disbursing Clerk. Department Ol SuSllCts OhS dred and twenty-five dollars for my ser vices as a Regular Assistant United States Attorney for the month of April 1905.' These receipts were forwarded the latter part of every month and paid by the Department.
 My accounts as special assistant were never, and are not now question: ed.
 "The Department wrote me many let A. in Unfk Sne- cial assistant. It audited and paid my accounts in that capacity without ques- tion except in one particular and that was when rendered my first account in June, 1905. according to the old salary table method of competing salaries by days The Department instructea1 me that this custom had been aban- doned and directed that may account hereafter be made up at the rate of so much per month. I did this, the ac- count was audited and paid. On Juiy IS, 1905 the Department wrote me Tn my capacity as special assistant, and congratulated me upon the work naa heeT doing in this special field. And on october ', 1905. the Department again extended my commission as spe- ciaI assistant, though 1t then knew was reGula assistant and had been paying me for that service Tor seven or eight months and writing me letter in that capacity, StS.
 '"There is nothing unusual in these two employments. Individuals oftep employ attorneys in two cases or In two @snes of work. Why not the gov ernment? The Department had done this before, notably in the case or Hon. Marion Irwin, of Georgia. who draws a salary as a regular United states attorney and a salary as special coun- sel in the Greene and Gaynor cases. This, I understand. has been done In a number of instances, where the ser vices are different.
 T gave up my undivided time ana attention to the work devolving upon me in these offices, at the expense Of my practice. How I have discharged the duties of these offices Is a well known fact. I have made claim for nothing which did not belong to me. I was paid the two salaries with the full knowledge of the Department of tbe existence of both commissions, as shown by the acts. letters and records of the Department. - 'Sro those who know me this state- ment Is unnecessary, but for those who know me not. I make this fully and freely"