Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1914-01-29
Mr.. CLAUDE REFUrEs STATEMENT
Attorney Tor Messrs. BessIey and
Cecil Explains His Position 10
The Case.
(Communicated.)

Communicated
To the Editors of the Evening Capt.
tai:
| deem IL only just and fair to Mr..
Cecil and myself thst | should correct
some errors in a statement that APP
peared in the columns of your paper
yesterday.
You state by q unanimous vote the
Commissioners decided to reject the
claim presented by Messrs. William
f. Cecil and W. Hallam Claude for
the payment of costs in the manda-
mus suit recently carried before the
Court of Appeals. Now, let us see
what are the real facts in the matter
under discussion. Mr.. Cecil was the
petitioner in an injunction proceed
ing. which asked the Court to pass an
demonstrating a former Board of
! County G commissioners from paying
G. Thomas Beasley. then Sheriff Ct
said county, $500 fee for executing
the death sentence upon a criminal
condemned to be hanged The result
was that the Court passed the order
as prayed for, aud restrained the said
Commissioners from paying said fee
to the said Sheriff; and furthermore,
it forbid its ever being charged or
paid for again.
This result having been obtained
by reason of the resistance of Nh.
Cecil as petitioner i'm the case and
| myself IS counsel representing him,
| ought to excite in the minds of open
minded and fair and reasonable tax
| pagers a sense of gratitude for the
trouble we were put to in the trans
action, aud while | am always averse
to making myself the central point
OF any discussion, in this instance,
feel that is obligatory flor a mo-
| ment) that should do so in my own
salf-defense. 1t IL my desire that
the truth and the whole truth shall be
brought out in alltransacti0us to which
| am in any sense 3 party to, either
directly or indirectly, and | wish to
state that in this matter, as ia all
| the other matters that / have been
connected with concerning the Tax
| payers League of this county,
have always been actuated and con-
trolled by motives that proceeded
from a most sincere desire of both
my heart snd mind TO advance and
| improve the public interest and well
fare of the community of which l
claim 20 been integral part and not
an altogether neglible factor thereof.
| For what l did as counsel in the par
ticular case now being discussed re-
1 vsna L. tak
any source.
The bill the Commits sioners we're
asked to pay was the actual costs
taxed / 4 the Court of Appeals and
the Court below, and involved clerks,
sheIiff's and appearance fees to coun-
sci in the case, and they amounted to
sos. 90 in the total Now, as TO
my come ction with the bill presented
to the Board. represented the bills
Of both Cecil and Beasley as their
counsel in order that the Board might
be correctly informed as to the facts
in regard to them. So that it is one
sense matter of perfect Indifference
to me personally whether the Board
paid the bills or not, as get my ap-
pearance fe - from Mr.. Cecil any
way. But | must confess that from
my point OF view of the matter, |
think that it would only be fair, just
and reasonable that the taxpayers
should pay the costs in a case by
which they gained such a substantial
and permanent benefit, as they did in
the case Of Cecil We. Commissioners of
Anne Arundel county. But it is quite
refreshing to see that the present
Board OF Commissioner under the
able leadership of their resident, have
started out with an ardent determine
ton to constitute themselves sturdy
and careful watch dogs over the
funds of the taxpayers in the county
treasury, and along this line 1t would
be pertinent to ask a few questions
of the president of the Board.
First Question-What officers. II
any, are now under pay who are not
performing service to the county,
and how long have said officers been
under pay without having performed
serviee7
Second Question--Is there more
than one road foreman appointed for
one and the same district of said coun.
ty, if, so, by what authority OF Law
can more than one foreman be ap.
uointedf
In conclusion allow me to say that
suppose ! have submitted the ques.
tion Of the propriety # the Commits.
sioners paying the costs involved In
the bills presented by me as counse
on behalf of both Cecil and Beasley
to at lest one hundred thoughtful
and substantial taxpayers who al
agreed after hearing all the circum
stances that il was only right, fail
and reasonable that the taxpayer
should bear the expenses in the case
w. HALLAM CLAUDE.