New-York tribune., 1910-10-21
ST|MSON TURNS THE
TABLES On PARKER
Recalls Fact That Former Judge
Defended the Sugar
Trust
AVERAGED $4,000 A YEAR
Candidate Shows How He Made
Great Financial Sacrifice in
Accepting District At
torneyship.
AVERAGED $4,000 A YEAR
IBy Telegraph to The Tribune. ]

Auburn. n. Y, Oct 20.-Replying to-
night in a formal statement TO the ac-
cusa ton of ex-Judge Parker that he
acted improperly in accepting a $4,000
fee for special work in the sugar prose-
cutions and the Morse appeal. Henry L.
Stimson turned the tables on his assail-
ant. He brought up the fact that Judge
Parker had defended the Sugar Trust.
He characterized Mr. Parker's criticism
as rather contemplate He said:
The statements which Judge Parker has
been making 10 my compensation for
services TO the government have been
brought to my attention. They involve
such a complete misrepresentation OF the
facts that ii Is worth while TO make this
statement in reply. Judge Parker asserts
that when I was appointed District Attor
ney l was a young lawyer anxious for
a job Of United States District Attorney
and its $4,000 a year. AZ a matter OF fact.
I d member of one Of the most sue
cessfuI law firms in New York City, and
my net income from my practice. over and
above all expenses, for the four years pre-
ceding my appointment as District AttOr
ney had averaged between $4,000 and s24 900
a year. : surrendered this to become Dis
trlCt Attorney, giving up entirely my pri-
vate practice and accepting an income of
about 40 per cent Of what had been pre-
yiOuSly earning.
Judge Parker then goes on TO assert that
Attorney he ID saw an opportunity to
make more money out OF the government
than the salary, If its representativ would
consent He asserts that for this purpose
I resigned the office and took a special re-
tainer TO complete the sugar cases. That
is rather d contemplate statement for a
former judge Of the Court OF Appeals who
knows ME and my position as well as Judge
Parker does AS a matter Of fact, l re-
signed my position to go back into private
practice, and no one knows better than
Il
I could nave made in New York practice
with my reputation as District Attorney
had I returned into private life free from
any obligations to the government and de-
voted my time 10 making money FOR my
self as he did when he resigned from the
Court OF Appeals.
and President TAFT not only without any
request of mine, but against my own
desire, urged me 10 argue the Morse ap-
peals and try the sugar and customs cases
some of which I had begun. l collected
S., 500 0o0 for the government under that re-
tainer l tried and won three appeals
arising out of the Morse case, going up
far as the United States Supreme Court
The figure of $1,000 which Judge Parker
states was the gross compensation paid me
by the government. OF this | received per
sonalIy not more than Sa6. 900 for the work
of a year and a quarter This was less
than | was earning even before l became
District Attorney.
Had I been one OF the district attorneys
in the districts of the United States where
the fee system still prevails I should have
been entitled under federal law 10 a COM
n1ission of . per cent for the collection of
the s3 500 coo or $4,000 even IL I had done
nothing else Judge Parker best knows
how much I would have received for the
Same work had I been in private practice.
because he once defended the Sugar Trust
when I prosecuted It. AS matter Of fact.
never sent in any olil 70 ne govern @ II rIleilt'
dent Taft and Attorney General Wicker
sham without any suggestion from myself.