The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-11-29
IN THE TWO COURTS
The Jury in Department IL has Been
Excused Until Dec. 8.
DIR. sTODDART'S CASE TO-DAY
On the 10th the Explosion Suits
Will Be Tried-About the Re-
versai Of the Damage Case
Of Peter Wasti.

Inc poSupOnemenl OF the GfOuuo
Squirrel mining case the trial Of which
was expected to consume about two
weeks or more. has left Judge Speers
court without a case on the trial cal
endar. and his jury has been excused
until Dec. 8. and the calendar win be
called tomorrow. Very little business
win therefore be transacted In depart
ment II. next week.
In Judge MoHatton's court to-day a
case against DR.. Stoddart. a suit for
fees claimed for legal services. viii be
tried. The first case or cases OF I'm
portance to be tried will be the explo-
sion damage suits which are set for
trial In Judge McHatton's court for
Monday. Dec. 16.
The reversal by the supreme court of
the damage case of Peter Wastel
against the Montana Union railway
company, works a great hardship on
the the plaintiff. After being run over
by a locomotive and crippled for life.
he finally after hard fight, obtained
a judgment against the company for
$1,000. That was two years ago. and
while he was not able to collect the
money, he had the assurance OF his
attorneys that he would get the In
terest on the amount as long, as pay
ment was deferred. Now comes the
supreme court and reverses the Judg-
ment on errors made by the lower
court in instructing the jury. and re-
mands the case for new trial. The
plaintiff. through no fault of his. must
now either fight the issue again in
the court or throw the case up. says
the Helena Independent.
The supreme court in reversing the
judgment takes exceptions to several
of Judge Speer's instructions to the
jury The two instructions on which
the case is remanded relate to the
credfbility of witnesses. There Is an
other on the same line that was deem
ed totally out of place and to which
Chief Justice w. Y. Pemberton, In his
opinion on the case, refers in a manner
that Is of interest to others as well as
the court and counsel. The instruction
| particularly cited is as follows:
'Tf you believe from the evidence
| that any witness has failed under a
| fear of losing his employment or de-
| sire to avoid censure, or a fear OF Of
| tending, or a desire to please his en-
| ployer, then such fact may be taken
| into account by you In determining
| the degree of weight which ought to be
| given to the testimony OF such witness,
and in such case you have a right to
] Judge of the effect, IL any likely to be
/
/ feelings or motives, and how far such
feelings or motives may tend to warp
his judgment or pervert the truth; and
| after applying your own knowledge OF
| human nature and of the philosophy
of the human mind to the investiga-
ton OF the subject, are to judge of the
| weight which ought to be given to the
testimony of such witnesses, taking
the same in connection with all other
evidence in the case"
On this instruction Chief Justice
Pemberton makes the following com.
ment in his opinion:
Counsel for the defendant contends
that there is no evidence in the rec
ord to warrant the giving of this in.
struction. We have found nothing II
the evidence to induce the court Il
give it 1t seems to have been giver
simply because the most of the wit
nesses for the defendant were in itl
employment. The objectionable feat
ure in THE instruction is found in TIT
judgment contained therein as to tbs
effect the circumstances and condf
lions assumed to surround the witness
es, evidently referred to. would hav'
upon their minds as witnesses testify
ing under the onditions and circum
stances that environed them. While I
is not necessary to say that the givin.
of this instruction alone would author
| lie a TeNcIcdl VI uuc case, yet we
say that we seriously doubt its correct
ness. Our people are a laboring PEG
pie. The large majority of them ar
employed by men, companies and cor
porations in the various industries o
the state. We cannot therefore ap
prove of an instruction, which declare
1t to be the law. even by intimation
that the fact of citizen being en-
ployed to labor for a person. compan.
or corporation, should be considered a
a matter to discredit him as a witnes
before the courts and Juries of tn
state. The relations witnesses sustain
. to the parties to a suit may becom
, grounds for argument OF counsel an
in proper cases should be considere
by juries in determining the weight I
DE given to their evidence. but grea
, caution should be taken by the court
in declaring the law upon such mat
tiers, hest they err by entering into q
, argument in their instructions on tn
: effect of such relations. or establish a
, unwarranted and, at least doubtft
! ground for Questioning the credibilit
!, | of the witnesses"