Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1894-03-22

knew Of the alleged attempt to steal
$4,000 from the state; knew it better
than any one else, and were willing
to assist; but failing, come in with a
claim of fraud, and right to recover
because one Of the defendants had told
them that somebody else would have
stolen $125,000 from the state Coun-
sci would search the books long for al-
thorlties to support such a position.
After Plaintiff Tracy had had it
Wrung from his reluctant lips that
tie profits were exorbitant, the plain
tiffs cane i'll and asked to offer evil
dence as to cost by a contract which
had no bearing upon their
knowledge of the facts Mr.. Flanders
argued further that the false represen-
tations which were alleged must be
material to make the evidence of their
falsity, and he held that the false
representations alleged against Clark
were not material to the alleged deep
ton.
The judges vital ruling was then
made as follows:
In determining this question, we
must not lose sight Of the fact that this
is an action by the plaintiffs to recover
as against the defendants upon the
ground of fraud committed by the
defendants, and not simply upon the
ground that the defendants were guilty
Of committing a wrong against the
state of Wisconsin.
LAS [ stated in the beginning of this
trial when the amendment was pro-
posed to the complaint, that is the ma
ture Of this action, and so far as TIE
acts and doings of the defendants as
to the state of Wisconsin are incidental
and material to establish that ground
Of action, so far the proof is material.
Whether or not the court has power
to exc. ud:' or permit this evidence, or
give it inte1 probation as a rule of law,
take it that it is beyond controversy
that the nature Of the action and the
state Of the proof must be taken into
consideration, so far as the party is
concerned who seeks to have it intro
duced; and that in view of such con-
struction by the court that question
must be determined. In this view of
it must rule upon this question on
tie proof brought into court by the
plaintiffs to sustain their cause of
action.
$50, then, I think that this evidence
cannot be material in the respect that
it is tho Ingredient to prove that the
defendants were guilty of fraud
against the plaintiffs, in that the repre-
sentation made was the direct ground
that induced the plaintiffs to part with
their money.
1.-The proof given by the plaintiffs
establishes beyond question that they
were fully aware and had full knowI-
edge of the profits in publishing this
roster under the contract as they en-
tered into it. They now come and say
that they were deceived by reason of
the fact that Mr.. Clark, one of the de-
PENDANTS, represented to them that if
the state printer did this work that the
cost to the state would be still greater.
Upon that question the knowledge pos
sessed by the plaintiffs, and the sur
rounding circumstances which were
within their knowledge, have put this
case where the law will not permit
them to say that that representation
is one upon which they had a right to
rely, but to the contrary. 1t was
a representation which, after they
knew of the enormous profit on the con-
tract as they made it, would be a wrong
against the state and came to them
pregnant with such wrong, and they
are bonnd by it.
Upon the other question, as to
whether they have a right to say that
1t is conspiracy against the state, the
reason which suggests itself to my
mind, and the rule which l think must
control it, are these: That these very
facts which the plaintiffs contend will
prove fraud against the state on the
part of the defendants are the very
facts that were within the knowledge of
the plaintiffs; and if it does prove a
fraud against the state, the plaintiffs
We're Possessed Of that knowledge just
as we'll as the defendants; and that be-
ing the case, they cannot come into a
court of justice and say that they were
OSSSlh GU ny ISdSOH VI IL, Wueu
own intelligence and prudence ought
to have suggested to them, as well as
to the defendants, that it was tainted,
and therefore that they had no right
to rely upon it.
Such being the import of this proof,
in view Of the established facts of the
plaintiffs case, it becomes a matter Of
law that it is immaterial, and that be-
ing the situation here, [ must sustain
the objection upon that"
The judge explained that he made
this lengthy ruling because, as he sug-
gested to counsel, he was fully aware
Of the import of this ruling as going to
the gist Of the action
The jury, which had been excused
while the arguments were being made
to the court, was recalled and George
Raymer was again put on the stand
and asked various questions per-
tanning to the cost of roster
printing under the present state con-
tract, etc, but the objections to their
being answered were sustained in
nearly every case and exceptions duly
noted.