Great Falls weekly tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1894-1???, 1896-10-30
VOTERS, STOP AND THINK.

and during that time no candidate has
found time to declare himself publicly
on the great issue that confronts the
people. So far as any public declaration
to which they could be held is con.
cerned, they have been as dumb as
oysters. They have been silver men to
silver men and gold men to gold men,
and on the fence to men whose opinions
they did not know. These are the facts,
and in the face of them, the gentlemen
on the republican ticket had up to a re-
cent period an idea that they could pull
through without exposing their real
opinion. But the disposition of the
voters to know where they stood was too
strong, and a republican meeting was
arranged for Belt last Saturday night at
which the republican candidates might
go on record. They had a good audience,
one that was ready and willing to
listen; all the leading republican can
didates were there, but what was
the result? One of them, Mr.. Freeman,
announced that he would vote for Bryan
and Sewall and Hartman and the re-
mainder appeared by proxy ald had
their spokesman. Sam Stephenson, say
that they were for silver.
Let us remind the voters that Nc
kinley says he is for silver; go does Tom
Carter; so does e d. Weed; SO does O..
f. Goddard; SO does Alex Botkin; SO
do the many men in this state who are
working against it's interests by attempt.
ing to induce voters to cast their bal
lots for the goldbug candidates. This
being for silver is played out. No man
is for silver unless he Loyalty and openly
supports Bryan and Hartman, and voters
have made a note Of this and will act ac-
cordingly.
Another remarkable feature of the
Belt republican meeting was the espe-
cial pains taken by the speakers to boost
the candidacy of Judge Benton for re,
election as judge Of the district court.
The TRIBUNE has no desire to be I'm.
fair to Judge Benton or to his
overzealous partisans, but it does
feel that it is in reason when
it shows that the judge is travelling
under false pretenses. AS the basis of
an argument why Judge Benton should
be re elected, one of the speakers at the
Belt meeting quoted from a document
sent out through the county by Judge
Benton himself, which purports to be
the court record for the years 1894 and
1895. and which, on its face, shows that
Judge Benton has tried a larger number
of cases and at a less cost than any other
Judge in the state.
If the figures were honest, they would
be to the credit Of the court, but they
are not. Let us be fair to the Judge and,
at the same time, fair to the voters.
Let us take the circular: 1t is headed
"Number of cases tried in the various
judicial districts of Montana in the
years 1894 and 1895, and the number of
cases disposed Of by each Judge in each
year" According to the table, Judge
Benton has tried more cases and
at a less cost per case than
any other judge. That this is
simply juggling with figures. In his
circular the judge says hat in 1894 he
tried 332 civil cases and in 1895, 1888 civil
cases. OF these he does not attempt to
give the cost. Now, here are the facts:
u no frinl rortcfar nf thu J;~+:at a,,,.@ =.
open to any citizen. We have carefully
examined it and find that during the
year 1894 there were Just POI judgments
entered on the civil docket. OF this
number 1874 were defaults and 10 by con-
sent or stipulation involving no trial;
there were 81 tried before juries and 20
tried before the court, making the actual
number of cases tried that year 81 in
stead of 1872. For the year 1895, we find
there were 1879 judgments entered. Of
this number, l26 were defaults and six
Judgments by consent or stipulation.
During the anne year there were 20
cases tried before a jury and 81 before
the court, making 81 actual II ials in
stead of 1888, as claimed.
On the criminal side Of the court the
discrepancy is equally as glazing. Mind
you, we are still quoting from the
docket. In his circular, from which his
friends quoted at Belt, it is said that
during 1891 there were "a convictions in
criminal cases, involving a total cost of
~97,o9l,lO, or an average OF S3lG.29 per
case. We do not know On what the fig
ures are based, but we do know that the
docket for that year shows 2C instead Of
"a convictions and of them II criminals
pleaded guilty and had no trial. This
leaves nine that were tried, and if we
divide the total of 1851. 10 between the
nine, we find that each trial cost the
county S943.45. For the year 1895
the judge in his circular says there we're
% convictions in criminal cases, the
total cost being So, 7G5. 90, and the aver