The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1899-10-27
SOME SPECIFIC CHARGES AGAINST
JUDGE STILLWELL.


a few days ago the REGISTER OBJ
served that the only charge against
Judge Stillwell was that he had held
the office long enough. In converse
tion with q resident of the south part
of the county however, we learn that
two other charges, and very serious
ones, are made against him. One Is
that he turned loose girl who had
been convicted of poisoning her moth
er; and the other is that in the trial
of the Cramer murder case he asked
such questions of the doctors that
Cramer was acquitted ON the ground
of insanity. The charge that Judge
Stillwell had deliberately turned two
murderers loose upon society Is so
inherently absurd that it would seem
to need no. contradiction; but as we
are assured il is.seriously made, few
plain statements regarding the cases
alluded to may not be out of place.
The first case is doubtless that of
frankie Morris, who was accused of
having poisoned her mother Tor the
sake of securing her life insurance
and was tried i'm Neosho county in
1884 or IS, if our memory serves. The
trial resulted i'm a verdict of guilty.
a motion for new trial was made
and granted, Judge Stillwell believ-
ing that the evidence did not warrant
the verdict Before the time set for
the new trial the county attorney be-
came convinced that the charge could
not be sustained and dismissed the
case. The girl then brought suit 10
| the United States court to recover the
| insurance due on her mothers life.
The insurance company set up as a
defense that frankie Morris had muir.
dured her mother. The case was
tried on that issue before David j..
Brewer, now one of the Justices of the
United States Supreme Court, and
the jury returned a verdict for Miss
| Morris. thus completely vindicating
| the correctness of Judge Stillwells
action in granting a new trial. In
| this connection it might he. added
that i'm 1887, two years after the trial
and when all the facts concerning il
were still fresh i'm the public mind,
Judge Stillwell was nominated by
the Republicans of the district for re-
election, and was endorsed by all the
other parties, and reelected without
opposition. This fact alone would
seem pretty efIectually to settle
charge number one.
Now as:to charge number two: This
was also a Neosho county case,
one Charlie Cramer being ac.
cused of numbering a DR.. Barth,
The case was tried sometime
during Judge Stillwelrs second
term, in 1888, we believe, and was %
course jury trial. 1t was a cele.
brated case which we remember very
well, and both sides were represented
by able counsel. The defense was in
sanityiand the verdict was acquittal
That is all there is of it. The charg,
that the Judge asked such questions
of witnesses as compelled an acquittal
or interfered in any other way to Sc
cure this verdict, is absurd. Tn,
charge was not heard of in the cam
paign which followed in 1891 whel
Judge Stillwell was again unanimous
= ly nominated by the Republicans, AM
elected, i'm spite of the wave Of Popu
lism which swept away so many othe
candidates, by more than thousan,
majority. 1t would seem to be rathe
a late. day to dig it up now.
4? The managers of Mr.. Lapham'
3 campaign are loudly claiming his elet
ton. They must place very 10y
:, estimate upon the intelligence of tn
} people of this District if they hope
n accomplish Judge Stillwell's defeat h
e charging him with judicial atroctiC
: alleged to have been committed frol
A ten to fourteen years ago, but whic
have i'm all this time utterly escape
the attention of every intelligent PEI
son, newspaper and political party
q the District.