The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-11-23
A POLITICAL FIGHT
SENATOR M.CUMBER SCORES ONE IN
HIS CONTEST WITH JUDGE
LAUDER
MANDAMUs ORDER IS ISSUED
The Supreme Court Holds That Law
der WiIlfuIIy Neglected to Call
in Judge ON Affidavit
of Prejudice.

BISMARCK, N. D.. Nov 22-The SUI
ppeme court has decided the mandamus
cases brought against Judge w. s. Lau-
der, of the Fourth judicial district, by
Attorneys McCumber and Forbes and
Freerks, for clients for whom they had
cases in court, which they claimed Judge
Lauder would not try or call in anoth-
er judge to dispose of. The bitterness
of the controversy, especially as between
Senator McCumber and Judge lauder,
attracted state interest, and the decision
will be received with equal interest
throughout the state. The upper court
holds against Judge Lauoer, finding that
he has failed and neglected and still falls
and neglects to perform his official duty,
as required Cby the statutes, and directs
Clerk Hoskfns, of the supreme court, to
issue a peremptory writ of mandamus
directed to Judge Lauder, directing that
official to proceed forthwith to arrange
for the trial of the cases in question
Costs IN the proceedings are taxed
against Judge Lauder, and he is requir-
ed to make return to the supreme court
on or before December, showing what
he has done in the matter.
The decision in the case is a long one,
and goes fully into the matters in con-
troYersy. 1t was written by Justice Wal
lin, Of the supreme court, and covers
twenty pages of closely typewriter
matter. The allegations of the plaintiffs
in the matter, which were that Judge
Lauder had refused either to try their
cases or to call in another judge to try
them, and that when a writ of manda-
mus had been issued by the supreme
court to compel him to hear the case, he
had adjourned the term of court before
the writ could be served upon him, are
related, and the court bases its findings
cf-t1r +a6
and the state law covering the question
of the duties of district judges in try
ing cases where affidavits of rejection
have been filed as We're filed in the case
in question.
The principal point in controversy In
the case was as to the nature Of the
efforts of Judge Lauder to obtain an
other judge to try the civil cases In
which an affidavit of prejudice had been
hled. This matter is gone into closely
by the court Judge Lauder, In his
brief and affidavit stated that he had
communicated with a number Of judges
in the state in an effort to get them
to come to Wahpeton to try the cases.
But an affidavit was presented to the SUI
preme court from Judge Winchester, of
the Sixth district, stating that Judge
Lauder had not communicated with him
regarding the matter, Winchester fur
lner stated that II he mad had week
or ten days notice he could have presid-
ed at the trial of the case. The supreme
court does not hold with Judge Lauder
that the necessities OF caring for the
grain crop in Richland county was "a
good excuse for discharging the jury,
which was composed mainly of farmers
The court says: Terms of court are
appointed by law and the legislative az
sembly, representing the whole people,
is presumed to have fixed the times Of
holding court with reference to the in
terests of all the people. It is to the
regular judicial tribunals that the cit
izen and taxpayer may look, and not
elsewhere, for redress of grievances and
for the protection of life liberty and
property. The interests Of suitors are
especially safeguarded by the law, and
every lawyer knows that repeated and
vexatious delays in the court are often
tantamount to a denial of justice