Brookings register. (Brookings, S.D.) 1890-1894, 1893-11-03
WITH THE PEOPLE.
The Republican Candidates tor Judges
of the supreme Court and the
Corporations
Misrepresented by the Populists but
Their Past Record Speaks for
Itself

Their Past RECORD Speaks for
Itself
The campaign in South Dakota for
Judges of the supreme and circuit
courts have reached the lying stage.
The Independent party realizing that
its cause is hopeless has now began a
systematic course of misrepreSenta-
tiOn and falSehOod against the repub-
lican candidates for the supreme court
to cover up the weakness of their own
candidates who are VIGOROUSLY known
to be untitled for the office to which
they have been nominated. With
their old thread worn cry of the cor
poration VS.. the people they are now
engaged in circulating through the
columns of their papers one of the
worst cOntOrtiOns of the truth i'm
aginable. But they have made mis-
calculation this time, and when the
truth of their false statements is
| learned the reaction against their
methods will cause hundreds of the
honest voters of South Dakota, who
had contemplated voting for the in
dependent candidates, to vote for the
republican candidates.
The article in question which the
Journal desires to call to the attention
of the voters Of this state was publish
ed in the Grant County Review and
since its first publication has been cop
led into majority of the independ-
ent papers of the state. The article
is headed THE Republican Supreme
Court Judges Satisfactory to the
Railroads." and is as follows:
The record the supreme court of
this state has made this year should
be gratifying to the railroad cOmpan
les. We find the following:
CrOnk vs.. G. NJ. & st. p. r. r. Ac-
tiOn for damage on account of fire.
The plaintiff recovered in the lower
court and was reversed in the SUI
preme court.
Smith VS.. c. NJ. & st. P. r. r. The
railroad beat IN the court below and
also beat in the supreme court.
Uhe VS.. c. NJ. & st. p. r. r. The
plaintiff beat in the trial court and
railroad won in the supreme court.
Beldng vs. Black Hills & Ft. Pierre
r, r. The plaintiff has judgment in
the trial court for So, 900 and the sup
rene court reversed the Judgment.
The jurieS in these cases thought
that the plaintiff ought to recover of
the railroads but the court thought
not.
The railroads have no ground for
| fear. The cases may have been de-
cided on the law, but tits difficult for
the common mind 70 comprehend
why. W.
Now what are the facts?
This article seeks to mislead the
people by leading them to suppose
that these four cases are all the rail
road cases that have been decided by
| the present supreme court.
There has been total of eighteen
railroad cases decided. OF this num-
ber thirteen were decided against the
railroad companies and five in their
favor. Sixteen of these cases were
appeals by the railroads and of these
sixteen twelve were affirmed by the
court and four reversed. OF the two
cases appealed by individuals, one was
affirmed and the other reversed.
The Independent papers have taken
the liberty of citing four of these
cases, three of which were reversed by
the court. The Journal has looked
up the record of the court upon these
cases and for the benefit of those who
might be misled we give the following
| facts which we guarantee to be cor
rect and can be verified by the official
records:
In Belding VS.. r. r. Co., the quest
ion was whether under our statutes
| the action of instantaneous killing
should have been brought by the ad-
miniStratOr of the deceased, or by the
widow and heirs. The supreme court
held that under section 5499, compiled
laws, the damages belong to the widow
and orphans and not to his creditors
and that the action should have been
brought by the widow. And we un-
derStand that an action is now pend
| ing in behalf of the widow. The
question was simply whether the ad-
miniStratOr or the widow and children
were entitled to the compensation for
| the loss of the husband and father.
The supreme court decided in favor of
the latter, reversing the trial court in
that respect.
In Uhe VS.. r. r. Co., the plaintiff
recovered judgment. The trial court
directed the Jury that if they found
| for the plaintiff they should add inter-
est Section 457S of the compiled laws
makes it optional with the jury
whether or not to allow interest. The
| Judgment of the supreme court was
that the judgment would stand If the
plaintiff would remit the interest,
otherwise the case should be retired.
The precise question had already been
decided the same way in North Da-
kota on the same statute.
In Smith VS.. r. r. Co., the judg-
ment in the trial court was in favor of
the company. The plaintiff appealed,
but filed no papers or record IN the
supreme court, nor took any steps to-