Williams news., 1906-10-06
R. H. CAMERON ANSWERS
 ATTORNEY H. F. ASHURST

Editor of the WILLIAMS NEWS:
 ! notice in Thursdays issue of the "Gem" complaint by MT. H. F. Ashurst against the action of the board of supervisors in taking this Bright Angel trail litigation out of my hands," Mir. Ashurst is evidently laboring under some mis- apprehension as to the action of the board. As district attorney, he has instituted an action which is now pending in the district court, en- titled:
 "The Territory of Arizona, by Henry F. Ashurst as district attor- ney of the County of Coconino, Ter ritory of Arizona. on the verified complaint of s. H. Fine, plaintiff, vs. L. L. Ferrall and the County of Coconino of the Territory of Ari- zona, body polite and corporate, defendants"
 The same authority which per mits the district attorney to insti- tute an action in the nature of quo warranto, empowers him to dismiss it, if in his opinion it should not be maintained.
 Had the county been plaintiff in stead of a defendant in the action, it would have been in the power of the board of supervisors to dismiss it, but the county being a defend ant, 1t is obvious that the board has neither the power to dismiss the action nor in any way control it's prosecution
 The board is fully aware of this limitation upon it's powers and has made no attempt to control MT. Ashurst in his conduct of the pros- eculion; but MT. Poison and myself, constituting majority of the board. have felt that successful prosecu- tion of this case would deprive the county of rights which may and ultimately will be of great value to it. We. have therefore passed resolution authorizing Edward M. Doe, Esq, to defend on behalf the county, he having kindly agreed to do SO without compensation.
 We have deemed this action nec- essary. because MT. Ashurst, hav- ing brought the suit originally against Ferrall, when the court held that the county had rights involved which must necessarily be adjudi- cated in the action and was there fore a necessary party defendant, and sustained a demurrer inter posed by Ferrall's attorneys be, cause of a defect of parties, asked leave to amend his complaint and make the county defendant therH- in and failed to drop the action, must be presumed to desire its suc- cessful termination in favor of the plaintiff, and therefore, although required by law to defend the coun- ity in all actions to which it is party. we feel that he is not in position to successfully or in good faith defend the county in the suit he is. prosecuting against it.
 Mir. Ashurt intimated that his purpose is to invalidate the con- tract, which was entered into for period of five years from it's date, between the county and Ferrall, but in his amended and last com plaint he asks that the franchise be forfeited and that the county, as well as Ferrall, be permanently de prived of all rights to ever collect tolls on the Bright Angel toll road.
 In other words, by his suit, he seeks to accomplish what the A, T. & S. F. By. Co. has during the last three and a half years vainly at- tempted, and the fact that he has prepared none of his pleadings and failed to open his mouth in court in connection with this case, no more relieves him from the respons- ibility for it's maintenance than does the fact it has been diligently and ably prosecuted by the legal repre-