EXPERIENCES WITH COUNSEL 163 
1903.” He had previously become an attorney of record, 
and the partnership of Munn & Church, consisting of 
Joseph L. Munn and Alonzo Church, had been formed, with 
offices, then as since, with the same entrance and adjoining 
the Park Board rooms at 800 Broad street, Newark. 
Other and similar payments to the above from 1897, or 
early 1898 down to time Counsel Munn’s “services” were 
dispensed with, January 1, 1904, were made. As to the 
propriety of these payments, or, under the circumstances, 
the partnership referred to, I prefer to make no comment. 
I merely state the facts as a part of this record. 
That conditions regarding the services—or lack of serv- 
ice—of Counsel Munn had not improved for more than two 
years after Commissioner Bramhall’s retirement from the 
Park Board in April, 1900, may be conclusively inferred 
from the action of the commissioners taken at the meeting 
August 13, 1902. The East Orange parkway was to have 
been the special order of business for that day, “but, owing 
to the failure of the counsel to report,” the following resolu- 
tion was adopted: “Whereas, the counsel has failed to re- 
port to the commission, which held a meeting at considera- 
ble personal inconvenience to the commissioners, for the 
express purpose of receiving his report; therefore, be it 
resolved, that the secretary notify the counsel that his negli- 
gence in failing to report as to the property between Main 
street and Central avenue has greatly inconvenienced the 
commissioners. Resolved, further, that the counsel be di- 
rected to report immediately to the chairman of the Com- 
mittee on Parkways as to whether he intends to see the 
property-owners between Main street and Central avenue as 
requested by the commissioners, and as agreed by him. 
“Resolved, further, that a copy of this resolution be sent 
to Mr. Shepard.” 
Since 1896 the question has been frequently asked: Why 
was this neglectful and faithless counsel retained by the 
Park Board for so many years? 
