The Evening critic. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1881-1885, 1884-05-09
THE KILBouRN-TAoMpsoN CASE.


Judge Bngner Decides the Award
Excessive, Hut Suggests u COmprO-
mise and That KiIbourn Accept
One-natf, or $3.50
In the Circuit Court this morning Justice
Hagner delivered his opinion and decision on
the motion for n new trial In the case of Mr..
Hallet Kilbourn against Hon. John G.. Thomp.
con, who sued tho latter for 100000 damages
for false imprisonment and arrest, ana tho
Jury awarded him 337,50o. Colonel Enoch
Totten, of the counsel for the plaintiff, and Dis
trict Attorney WorthingtoD, for the defendant,
and Mr.. Kilbourn himself were present.
Judge Hagner said that the only ono Of the
numerous grounds on which n new trial was
urged and which needed attention was that OF
the 2Sth ana dSth Wisconsin, which no con-
ceived to be the correct version OF the law as to
exemplary damages. In reference TO tho
point raised that this was the third timo that
the jury had found for the plaintiff, and the
court should not intervene, the Judge held
that tho stand taken was not correct, as II was
court for Justice to both parties. He said
taking out the two previous verdicts
This was "a Verdict Exceedingly
Large,
and no verdict could be found In cases OF this
kind, and search had been made, that could
approximate 1t. lie then read number of
cases where damages in lees sums than this
verdict had been found, and In every instance
set aside on the ground that tho sum was eX-
cessive. The Judge proceeded to review the
facts In the case, and said that II could not be
doubted that all the Jury took into
consideration was tho indignity offered Mr..
Kilbourn, and for this MIR. Thompson was only
responsible for what no did himself.
1hiftyseven thousand flvo hundred dol.
lars was far more than tho average fortune OF
the people OF this country, and this was to
come from Mr.. Thompson and It was a lien on
his property. They did not know but IL II was
enforced that II would place Mr.. Thompson In
ncnnry. But the moment II was said that Mr..
Thompson would not havo to pay It, thon II
was that tho verdict could be explained.
II the jury had been instructed TO ind
punitive damages, he was unable to see how
they could have found more than they did. 1t
seemed to him from the best consideration
that ho had given to tho case, and no would
like to see the matter settled, that he must
Decide the verdict Excessive.
This case had now been pending eight years.
1t hung on two lives. Either man might die
ana that would end 1t. He would like to SEQ
the case ended, ana would say that II the
plaintifr, say within Ave days, would
Enter n Remitter for SI7, 800.
he would let tho verdict stand. Tho Judge
who tried the case before said that IL the YER
diet had been between 10000 and $4,000 no
would have let II stand. He would say fur
thermore, that even then, and he thought It
right to say II, occupying the position he did,
Otcourse this verdict would constitute prece-
dent If 1t stands; that It would be
che Largest Verdict I'm u Case OF
That Kind
which had been rendered In this county. II
the Speaker OF the House and the House of
Representatives itself injured this man, II is
but proper that they should repair the dam.
age; but Mr.. Thompson should not be made to
suffer VIGOROUSLY for what they did. II was n
large verdict even standing at $4,000, and
therefore he did not wish II to be considered
as statement by him that II was a reasonable
one. He did not intend ct all to bind himself
or any future judge who sat there hereafter as
saying IL was q proper verdict In the case.
Tnat was not thing for him TO Bay,
Colonel lotion, when asked by q CRITIC ro-
porter II tho proposition of the Court would ba
accepted, said he could not tell, as theysadd
not consulted on the subject.