Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1913-02-09
Miller
MAKES A REPLY

I IN an interview given ouL NY
General Andrew Miller today with respect
| to the certain resolution introduced by
Representative Fox of Burleigh county
| on February 9Th, 1913, calling for an in
| y%estigation of the Offices of the attorney
| general, the ex-secrctary of state, T..
y. Norton, State Engineer Atkinson, the
tax commission and the state board OF
| control, Mr.. Miller said that the resolu-
! ton on It's face showed plainly its OBJ
| ject and purpose.
Commenting further insofar as the
| resolution related to his office, he said:
'The resolution charges me with four
| things: First, that il is currently re-
| ported that l am engaged in the private
| practice of law and have an office down
town. 1t seems to me that it is hardly
necessary to appoint an investigating
committee to discover if u be true,
| because I rave at all times had and main
| tanned a private office down town where
1 conducted my private practice through
my partner. and the location Of my Of
| fies are well known, contain my firm
| name advertisement in seVt"ar' places,
and we advertise in the papers,; so 1t
! would seem that it was entirely unneces-
| sary to waste the states money by APP
! pointing an investigate committee to
| discover this fact. .
Second: 1t, charges that my two as
| sistant attorneys general are also en-
gagged in the private practice in addition
to their official duties. Inasmuch as both
| Of these men also have we'll known Of
| fees down town, and advertise, it seems
that it would not be necessary to ex-
pend the states money in discovering
this important fact.
"Third: 1t charges that l nave fitted
up at the capitol three rooms which are
, used for the personal use n benefit
of myself and assistants with my steno-
! graphic help. When the author of the
resolution introduced that resolution. he
knew that this statement was q bare
faced bold falsehood without any facts
whatever to warrant it, II further, that
there is not, and never has been, such
report ,curreat. Therefore. it could not
he necessary to expend the states mon
ey in an investigation Of this report.
Fourth: That | had for many days
used one Of my stenographers that was
being paid by the state in my down town
office in connection with my private bus.
Mess. The author ofthe resolution with
out the necessity of the committee of
investigation, knew full we'll that there
was no law in this state that prohibited
me from engaging in the private prac.
tice CT law. On the contrary, the law
expressly contemplates that I should do
so; for the bill that fixes my salary, when
~~oA;~oj ~ II ~ ~ ~ xl,o
proposed to fix the salary of the attOr-
i ney general at five thousand dollars per
year with a provision that he should not
engage in the private practice of law.
The legislature purposely and intention
ally struck out the five thousand dollars,
and also that provision providing that
should hot engage in private practice,
! and fixed such salary as it thought ade-
quate without requiring me to give un
my private practice. He also knew that
there was, no law in this state that pro-
1 hibited either Of my assistants from en-
gaging in private practice, and that ev-
cry attorney general of this state prior
!, to my incuinbency in the office was en-
gagged in private practice during the
term Of his office.
HE could also have discovered by in
teryiewing me IN the subject without the
necessity OF an Investigating committee,
and have learned that some of the states
business has been carried on by me, al
times, at my down town office, n that
at times when l am there I have had one
Of my stenogTaphers there at my service
and If he had any desire to know the
truth, he would have also known that
the. business of the state has not beer
neglected either by myself or assistants
at any time; that in the payment Of my
clerical help I had never exceeded the
appropriation made by the legislature fol-
hat purpose; or, in fact, used it all.
II do this year. as well as in the past,
welcome an investigation Of my office
and will be glad to std the committee ap.
pointed for that purpose in any manner
that I can.
Another statement that is as inten.
tionally libe!ous as it is false is where
in the resolution he states that 1t i.
currently reported that P. D. Norton
while secretary Of state, received Ger.
tain fees for the years Of 1911 and 1871:
under the provisions Of Section s Of tn,