The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1911-01-26
AS ro rHE EEE sYsrEM.


Fred S. Jackson, the former attorney
general, expresses the opinion that the
proposition favored by this paper of
abolishing the system of feeling the at
torney general and his assistants for
prosecutions under the prohibitory law
would mean that the attorney generals
office must not interfere in such prose-
cutions And he goes on to particu-
larize, not as to the merits of the at
torney general and his regular assist
ants receiving such fees, but as to the
need of them to give compensation to
county assistants, as he calls them. or
special assistant attorneys general, as
they are more Familiarity known, which
are sent into localities where the reg
ular county officials are negligent in
enforcing the prohibitory law.
Certainly such special assistants are
entitled to compensation for the work
they do. and it may be that the fee
system is the best way to provide it,
as they are appointed for irregular
periods of time, and it would be diff
cult to put them on a salary basis.
But this has nothing to do with the
question of the right and reasonable
ness to allow fees to the attorney gem
work as they do in connection with en-
forcing the prohibitory law. That is
the feature of this fee system which
strikes the State Journal as being ques-
tionable. But Mr.. Jackson in his most
recent statement on the subject does not
discuss the merits of this proposition
at all.
In his first statement. which was
1f fI,ah
of representatives in passing the reso-
luton to investigate this matter OF
fees. he intimated in a rather subtle
fashion that the attorney general and
his regular assistants were entitled &c
fees to bring their wages up to some
thing like what they should be in COM
parison with the work done by the at
torney generals Office. He called at
tention to the fact that many of the
lawyers opposed to the attorney gen
erals department in several of the i'm
portant suits brought in the name OF
the state of Kansas are men who re-
ceive from $4,000 to $4,000 a year for
their services While the assistant at
torneys general who opposed them re-
ceived salaries of $1,000 and $1,000, and
he as the head of the state law de-
partment received but about $4,000 per
annum, including the 1900 a year in
fees that he had received for prohibi-
tory prosecutions.
It is an undeniable fact that many
of the officials in this state are rather
niserably paid for the work that is
expected of them and the responsible
ity that is placed on their shoulders
And it may be that $500 a year is
not adequate compensation for the at
torney general. and that the salaries
paid his assistants are not large
enough. But it is also an undeniabie
fact that there are always plenty OF
candidates for these positions, who
know full well what the salaries are
And it is not recalled that Mr.. Jackson
was at all reluctant to accept his first
or second nomination to the attorney
generaIship, with it's salary at the fig
ure that the law now allows.
If the attorney generals salary is
too small, as we'll as the salaries OF
other state officials, the legislature
should see to it that they are raised
to proper proportions. But no matter
what the salaries may be, it does seem
that state officials should do all the
work of their offices without extra COM
pensation in the way of fees. And in
the matter of fees for the attorney
general and his assistants for the pros
ecution Of violations of the prohibitory
law, situation is created that might
result in grave injustfces being done
if this department should ever get in
INSCRIPTIONS hands.