The Manitowoc pilot. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1859-1932, 1880-03-11
COMMUNICATION.

l.
last week contains an article in which
justices of the peace and constables gen.
orally, and myself specially, are subject
ed to severe and unjust criticism.
You say that justices and constables
advise and instigate litigation at the ex-
pense of the county. This is not only
untrue. but a calumny, at least as far a.s
justices are concerned. If o justice
should advise criminal proceedings for
trifling offenses, and the state lose the
suit, such justice would receive the just
censure of the complaining witness not
only and his friends, but of the public
generally. I know of but one case where
that was done, and this case was settled
through the interference of John P.
Wickert, Esq, and myself, and an agita
ton commenced which resulted in the
defeat of the justice who had abused his
office. But should justice be known
to advise such litigation, the defendant
would most certainly make al affidavit of
prejudice and Mr.. Justice would only act
as a drummer for a competitor, whose
Office is the nearest. But, sir, justices
of the peace don't do such kind of bus
mess.
That justices charge all the fees they
are entitled to, is true, and also that they
make as many folios as possible. But
these facts are prescribed by statute, and
as far as folios are concerned, they can
only act in conformity to the statute,
which prescribes that full and correct
minutes of the testimony shall be kept
The justice cannot write down more than
the witness testifes, and not the justice,
but the attorneys do the questioning.
If the justice had to do the questioning.
the minutes would not be half so long as
now generally is the case. But the fees
of justice are not exhorbitant; for some
work, of course, he receives good pay,
for other work very little, and he receives
no pay at all for the time occupied by
attorneys in sometimes useless, some
times nonsensical arguments or even in
abuse of each other. Besides most just
ices always advise settlement of pend
ing cases, and even make O reduction
from fees already earned, to facilitate
such settlement.
So your attack on justices generally is
unfair and unwarranted; but far more 80
is the attack on me. You state that in
case which was tried before me for ten
days, the case was dismissed for technical
reasons, which might just as we'll have
been decided before any testimony was
taken. You seem thereby to insinuate
that tho motion to dismiss on the ground
of the dismissal was made at the COM
mencement of the trial. That is not SO;
it was made at the close of the case and
decided after lengthy argument.
Now, sir, justice of the peace is not
expected to correct the papers drawn by
a prominent attorney, and besides that
he has no right to decide motion before
it is made. 1t this case, it is true, mo-
ton to dismiss was made before testimony
was taken but this motion was for differ
ent reasons than that on which it was
dismissed. The first motion to dismiss
was on mere irrelevant reasons and cleri-
cal errors, the last on reason which our
state supreme court had decided to be
good, and the omission in the complaint
to be fatal ! do not know whether or
not the attorneys for defense knew of the
defect at the beginning of the trial, but
I know that I aCas not and could not be
aoUare Of 1T.
But your attack against me is the more
unwarranted, as you had occasion to con-
vince yourself of the truth or untruth of
the charge which believe was circulated
for selfish purposes by q persen who
kneW it to be false, who knew he lied.
You have therefore made your paper the
tool of foul and malicious liar, by not
hloo Oii VI ihioi liz VI
the charge. do not charge this your
omission of duty was done maliciously,
or with the intent to do wrong, but you
have done wrong in fact, and you can
easily convince yourself of your wrong
by calling at my Office 10 look at the
minutes, or by asking the attorneys in
the case, Messrs. A. J. Schmitz, district
attorney, G. W. White or G. A. Forrest.
The calumny against me, no doubt,
was circulated by an aspirant for the
Office which / now hold, in the belief
that / was candidate for reelection.
The miserable creature might just as
well not have burdened his conscience
with this lie; 1 have for almost half a
year openly and publicly declared that
would not be q candidate for reelection,
because my business requires my full
time and labor. L herewith repeat the
announcement, that 1 am not candidate
for the Office of justice of the peace, or
for any other Office in the gift of the
people, now, or in the near future. L
have never sought this Office, and shall
never seek it, Yours etc..