Little Falls weekly transcript. (Little Falls, Morrison Co., Minn.) 1894-19??, 1900-06-26
1.-THE Decision"

1.-THE Decision"
The crusade Of deception and
falsehood against the Electric &
Water company which has been 80
energeticaliy prosecuted by the
Herald and its editor, G. E. Vasaly,
almost reaches a climax in that
papers comments on the decision.
In the same issue that contains the
decision, the editor clearly misrep-
resents the contents OF the decision.
The editor misquotes the decision
and then says:
''According to this a corrupt coun-
Gil could contract for thousand n.y.
drants at $3.50 each, and the citizens
would have no redress"
That decision can be easily read,
and it shows plainly that the court
carefully considered the abundant
evidence as to reasonableness OF the
number of hydrants and number OF
lights, and also the reasonableness
Of the price for hydrants and
lights. Judge Lochren did not de-
eide or intimate that the people had
no redress against such an absurd
contract as the Herald suggests.
But finding from the evidence that
the prices and length OF contract
were not unreasonable, the con-
tracts are sustained.
The plan of the Herald seems to
be to create the impression that
Judge Lochren rendered decision
against the evidence in the case. 1t
has been easy for the Herald to pub
lish a mass of absurd statistics, but
when it's editor was on the stand as
q witness in this case he certainly
made q holy show of himself. There
were the time and place for him to
enliehten the court and the public
on water works plants and electric
light works, yet his evidence was
not worth the paper it was written
on. He realized it himself. One Of
his brilliant samples Of ''evidence"
was that there was opposition to
the company and the contracts be-
cause the editor Of q Republican
paper took part in politics. That
coming from the editor Of the Demo-
cratic paper was indeed rich.
1t is easy for the Herald to declare
the city is being robbed, and that
prices are unreasonable. When the
matter came into court it was g.
question of proof. II ex-Mayor
Vasaly and his co-conspirators
could have proved that, the city
would have won the case. t,.
Bat they couldn't. They had led
many of the people to believe that
they could. When the test was ap.
piled under oath they completely
and fatty failed. 49,,
The Herald is angry and vicious.
Vasaly's crusade was an enjoyable
one until he was given opportunity
In court to show the truth OF his re-
peated charges. He failed and the
city lost. 1t has been expensive to
the city and humilieting to Vasaly-
in fact since his appearance in the
case In court it has been rather dis
astrous to his political plans. ',
But by the expenditure Of q few
thousand dollars Of the Taxpayers
money the date Of Mr.. Vasaly's final
and complete humiliation may be
postponed for a time. Mr.. Vasaly
can we'll afford to advocate tho in
vestment. His appeal for an appeal
is pathetic, and he has strong rea-
sons for his anxiety In the matter.
He dislikes the day that he must
acknowledge that he has been lead.
ing q profitless and disastrous cru
SADIE. ..'
He wants it poe tponed as long as
possible, regardless Of expense.
Meanwhile he may explode.