The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1895-04-13
JOBES' PLAGUE.
Court Records Sent to Topeka
from Harper
In Relation to the New Bank
Commissioner.
ECHOES OF A ROW
And a Ten Thousand Dollar
Defamation Suit
Which Mr.. JObes Brought and
AfterwArd Withdrew.

Mr.. j. d. Bradley, a harper CounSy
lawyer who lives at Attica, the home
town of ME-. C. S. Jobes, the newly ap-
pointed bank commissioner, has just sent
a Topeka man a certified copy of some
court records which do not show the new
bank commissioner up in an enviable
light.
Lawyer Bradley says that in March,
1890 Mr.. Jobes filed a suit in the district
court Of Harper county against man by
the name of George II. Young for $lO,-
000 damages for defaming his good
name and character because Young had
said that Jobes was ''thief' and was
was robbing tho creditors of the Attica
sugar mill and stealing from the Attica
Sugar company
Soon after this suit was filed Mr.
Young filed his answer, and when the
answer was filed and before the suit
came to trial Jobes dismissed his case
Lawyer Bradley has now sent a Topeka
man certified copy of the answer filed
in this case which he says caused JObes
to dismiss his suit for damages.
In this answer after denying tnat he
had used the words credited to him, Mr.
Young said that if he did use them
hs was justified in so doing, for the rea
son that said words were aud are true in
substance and fact, and that said plain
tiff was guilty of systemati-
the Attica Sugar company and
the Kansas State Sugar company, by
virtue of his office of receiver of same
And has unlawfully. wilfully and inten-
tionally so managed and conducted his
said trust as such receiver and had so
used and disposed of the moneys, funds
and property that had come into his
hands as such receiver that the creditors
of said Attica Sugar company and Kan
sas State Sugar company, were unjustly
and unlawfully deprived of the benefits
of the same in part and that the plaintiff
WAS not damaged by said words in his
good name, fame and character as he
alleges in any sum of m0uey whatever.
Alr. Young then denied that he ever
knew or had cause to know that plaintiff
as such receiver or otherwise sustained
good name, fame aud character among
his neighbors for moral worth, integrity
and honesty of purpose as alleged in
plaintiffs petition"
In one section of his answer Mr. Young
tells what Mr.. Jobes' neighbors say about
him. This section reads as follows:
This defendant was lead to believe
from the common expression of the peo-
pie and the country talk in, around and
about the neighborhood, where plaintiff
has for the last two years lived, to-wit:
Attica, Kansas, that plaintiff was a man
in whom the people had no confidence
for integrity and honesty of purpose;
and that plaintiff was a man devoid of
honor, integrity and honesty of purpose.
aud that plaintiff was generally con
demned by all the good people of his
neighbornOod. That plaintiff bears the
name of being a slick rascal and it is gen
orally reported in plaintiffs neighbor
hood, by plaintiffs neighbors, that
plaintiffs own father-in-law, one Taylor.
while in the city of Attica, Kansas. in
about 1887 stated in speaking of plain
tiff, using the expression that Charlie
(meaning plaintitf) was a slick one"
''That plaintiffs manner of conducting
the affairs of the office of his receiver
ship of the Attica Sugar company and
the Kansas State Sugar company and the
creditors thereof has given rise to such
talk and expressions among plaintiff 5
neighbors, and the expressions have be-
come quite general in plaintiffs neigh
borhood that plaintiff was systematical-
ly robbing the Attica Sugar company
and the Kansas State Sugar company
and was stealing from the same
and from the creditors thereof; and that
kong before and prior to the use of anv
and all of the words and expressions i'm
puted to have been used by this defend
ant, as charged in the plaintiffs petition
1t was common saying and by-word
among the plaintiffs leighbors generally
used in the neighborhood around and
about the city of Attica, Kansas, to wit
say when plaintiffs neigh bors wanted to
condemn person for doing wrong, thew
say he is as big a rascal as Jobes, mean
ing plaintiff; he is as big a thief as
Jobes, meaJjng plaintiff; saying
they would not believe him any
sooner than they would believe
Jobes. meaning this plaintiff
that they had no more confidence in hin
than they had in Jobes, meaning thi,
plaintiff; that he is as mean man a;
Jobes, meaning this plaintiff. also tha
the expression was common saying il
plaintiffs neighborhood long before tn,
words stated to have been used bv thi
defendant, as alleged in plaintiffs peti
ton; that Jobes, meaning plaintiff, was
liar, thief, a robber, rascal anC
slick one; and that Jobes, meanin.
plaintiff, would swear to anything. an(
that they, the people, would not beIiey,
Jobes, meaning plaintiff, under oath.
''That all the words used exrrezse,
spoken by this defendant. if used at Al
by defendant, were not used ns aIIeoa,
in plaintiffs petition, bur were used !
used at all, any of them by this defend
ant,was because defendant believed then
to be used as stated by plaintiffs neioh
bors as aforesaid"
Mr.. Young gives what he alleges !
his personal experience with Mr.. Joha
and tells why he sued him for damage
in one section, which reads as follows.
defendant states to the court that !
ne used any of the words imputed +
this defendant By said petition of plain