Gunnison news-champion., 1923-01-05
: 10 TIE PUBLIC

ligns1 M. vhiek aVDssssd n vSzi-
lpIS ec(k15a1pa1ies lase WSeaE, In At
ltemptiAgrp &6Snd hlmseh, has d.
lteetly ~ ~ inkimsttea ehargsa ths
Ceeafy At6eeney aaA his assseiats
vttA recelyiAg unwassanto1 1ees from
~ cesaey tsUansZ. u oeWlhsms
nas . eeea and al1lisia1 ae6snss In
the present contrevsssy 4 would
eeeu Unnecessary 10 puAliaA vindiei.
tive Statssnents regarding other Per
eons. ] d net care 70 sagags in any
tnewspapsr s-eontrovoySy. However,
aincs 1 have been attached, aesirs 70
%prsseak to. stAe public briok Oeate-
ment 70 correct erroneous statements
concerning myself and associata.
The particular attack appeared
fArst In thA matter Of expenses drawn
ey ths County Attorney, and, seeond-
ny, In The matter Of certain retainers
and sxpenses paid 70 the law firm Of
which am . member.
!. As TO the matter Of expenses, Il IL
sufficient TO say that Il II . matter Of
common knowledes that TIE County
attorney is allowed his expenses TO
the annual CONVENTION Of the State
Association u County Attorneys, held
in Denver. > County attorneys Of
ether counties arc allowed expenses
to this annual convention. The re-
cords at the Court House will reveal
that my predecessors for years have
! always billed the county for their ex-
penses and their claims were always
allowed by the Board Of County Com
missioners. Il il customary for coun-
ty attorneys to be recompensed for
their time and expenditures during
the time they are away from their
practice. engaged in the interests Of
the county. The vouchers presented
by me for my expenses are properly
signed and sworn to as required by
law. have made these claims under
oath, and. il there is the gross fraud
and irregularities alleged, the laws
| certainly provide ample recourse.
|, Relative to the matter of the re-
!, tanners and expenses paid to the firm,
Of which ] am member, it should be
borne in mind that the County Attor-
ney receives seventy-five dollars a
month rs advisor to the Board of
County Commissioners. The County
Attorney is not expected nor required
to prosecute or defend actions in
court for the County Commissioners
or for other county officers. The Dis
trict Attorney-not the County At
torney-is the advisor Of county Of
ficials other than the Board Of County
Commissioners. The County Attor-
ney is also required to appear In lun-
acy proceedings, and. in proceedings
children. He is also advisor to the
tends to the numerous routine county
Il ms ttnra hso otx Tk~aa
matters are numerous and the Coun-
ty Attorney gives value received with
OUT appearing in lengthy litigation,
without additional compensation.
The additional compensation paid to
US during the past two years has been
for services performed by my partner
and myself In the Hutchinson cases,
involving as defendants in one case
the county sheriff, county assessor,
and the county treasurer. The same
was fought through the district and
supreme courts, and CONSUMED the
major portion Of four months. It
neceasttated one trip to Montrose and
one trip to Grand Junction for court
hearing and investigation. Each trip
consumed three days. We advanced
railroad fare and expenses, court fees,
telephone and telegram charges, and
other necessary expenses that we were
put 70 and which we actually advanc-
ed amounting to about sixty dollars.
We billed the county $4,000 in this
case for services and expenses. These
figures Indicate that we received about
$4,000 for sll Of the work performed
by the drm and for fighting the case
through the Supreme Court. II any
one believes that this was not q mo-
deSe fee, he can easily satisfy himself
BY retaining an attorney TO carry such
cAse through the Supreme Court to
final conclusion.
-Last fall four damage suits were
commenced against various persons;
one against w. T. Hartman and two
against Alex Thomas, former as
j SCISSOR, and one against Pat Hanlon,
sheriff. The County Attorney is not
obligated nor is it his duty to either
advise these officials or to defend
them in Court, even though the actions
against them were the result Of hold
ing county offices. 4 As the county Of
Gunnison was interested in these
cases, the Commissioners retained our
finn, together with other local Jattor-
tneys, as counsel to defend the in
terests Of the County in these matters.
Our retainer was seventy-five dollars
in each case. We have already per-
formed . considerable amount Of
work in these cases, and a great deal
of work remains to be done during
the year 1923 and possibly subsequent
years. The tax question involved in
these eases II Of paramount import
ance 70 tie people Of Gunnison ccun-
~, and y Of sufficient financial In
!, terest 70 the taxpayers to justify the
i enpioyment Of counsel.
/ Ihe vouchers in these latter eaeea
weee also slgned and sworn to e re-
q9trod by law and were regularly a.
ewea ~ H. Beard Of County Com
MATT J. KocHEvAR