The record-union., 1896-12-03
THE "EXAMINERo AND THE
COURTS.

No decision Of the courts of the peo
Pile that does not conform to the vicious
ideas the San Francisco Examiner
enter'tains of law, and it's very narrow
and much warped conceptions Of the
fundamental principles of justice, fails
sheets, which uses all such opportunity
to do what it can to infane it's readers
minds against the courts and the law.
It is so persistent in this course and
manifeStly SO vicious and unconscion-
able about it that some examples of its
malice and ignorance are worthy Of ci
tation-
In the matter Of the Supreme Court
decision in the case of Thompson, the
train-wrecker, the Examiner" Of yes
terday said:
The first trial established Mr.. Thomp
sons guilt beyond question, and as it
led TO his sentence to be hanged was
naturally distasteful to him. Hence
the new trial.
The vicious fling in this Is patent. Now
what is the truth? First, that appellate
courts cannot consider individuals when
cases come up on appeal; they deal with
principles. Second. that the question of
guilt or innocence cuts no figure in
passing upon the question whether one
accused of crime has been tried and con-
victed as the law directs.
a,-fxr /
quired to abide by the law in trying the
guilty, the liberty Of the innocent will
also be imperiled. In the Thompson case
the trial court gave the jury an instruc-
ton based on assumed facts which in
truth did not exist, were not proved; in
short, precisely the opposite condition
existed to that enormously assumed by
the court.
The Supreme Court, therefore sends
the case back for new trial, pointing
out very clearly the dangerous error and
why we cannot afford to punish even the
guilty by violation of principles of the
law which protect all We are to con-
vict and hang murderers, but We must
do SO according to the methods the law
provides for the safety of society. the
law made by ourselves.
In the same issue the same malignant
journal assails the San Francisco Su-
perior Court because it asserted the
principle founded in wisdom, and that
has existed as long as man has had a
judicial system, namely, that the law
abhors much litigation, and will not en-
courage it, and that It will not permit
in good faith and that are the outgrowth
OF conspiracy to prosecute For this as
sertion of a living principle the Exam
lner" abuses the Superior Court and
charges the Judge with staying justice
and defeating rights of citizens, and in
Inmates that the court is under the con-
troll and dictation Of railroad corpora
ton.
Let us see what justification the sheet
had for that assertion A party recov-
cred against the Southern Pacific Com
pany In an action under the statute for
violation Of stop-over privileges, and had
Judgment for the statutory penalty Of
$500. Thereupon some 5000 suits Of like
character were brought against the
company. The latter then moved for an
order requiring these suits to be consoli-
dated into one, and the Superior Court
made the order.
The court found by the admission OF
the parties themselves that the cases
were made; they were not brought in
good faith, the plaintiffs were not actu-
ally travellers, but got off and on Local
trains many times day for the sole
purpose of laying foundations for htiga-
ton. Beyond all question this was
rroyed in court, namely, that there was
a conspiracy to make cases for the
nurnose of gain, not in response to dam
ages inflicted. There was the absence
saws the court, of that bona fides thai
the law requires for the maintenance OF
any litigation. Neither courts Of equity
nor vet courts of law, will permit con-
spirscy to create litigation It 70 opposed