Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-05-16
STATE PRINTING LAGS
Delay in Printing Supreme Court
Decisions Forces Executive
Council to Act.
Dissenting Opinion by Justice
Ladd in the Garfield Coal
Company Case.
Supreme Court Lays Down Rule
in Slander Cases..New
Catholic See.

Catholic See.
Special to Times Republican.
Des Moines, May l6-There is no one
thing in connection with the manage
inent of state affairs more troublesome
to state officials than that of the print
ling of state documents. papers aid
hooks. The trouble over the printing OF
the reports of the supreme court is in
point. The work has been tagging De-
| hind for several years. 1t is true that
| lawyers are not deprived of access to the
\ decisions of the courts, for the law re-
porters publish the decisions in few
weeks after they are announced. and
/ nearly every lawyer takes the reporters
4 tc get these decisions. but the official
4 Ireports, with the official syliabi, are not
! to be had for u long time after the de-
LESSONS are announced. The court has
4 announced decisions sufficient to make
! at least four more volumes than have
keen printed. The copy for the printer
is prepared by Ben Salinger, court re-
1 porter, and the printing is done by
1 George Ragsdale. formerly state printer.
| Each one blames the other for the delay.
/ The printer says that the copy comes
| Slow. that when proofs are sent back
! there are many changes made, and that
4 the proofs are not returned in time.
4 That there may be an Understanding of
4 What is going on the state executive
council has given directions that SAL
| niger shall turn his copy over to A, III.
4 Davidson. secretary of the executive
| council. who Will send it TO Ragsdale,
and VIII get the proofs and forward
| them-in short, that the whole work
1 shall be done thru the office of The SEC
! ietary of the executive council. Then
/ the council will be able to fix the blame
/ If any, for the long delays 50 costly TO
4 the lawyers of the state. Another source
i of complaint on the part of the printer
is that the copies which are furnished
free to the state are sold in competition
4 With the copies from which he must
make profit. They are not sold direct
to lawyers. but some of the copies for
the state library and the State Univer-
sity library re turned over to. publish
4 ing houses in exchange for reports from
ether states and in this way get into
1 the channels of trade. This matter Will
Il
of reports from Ragsddle. which was
condemned by the supreme court on ac-
count Of the poor Workmanship. has
differently and the court has accepted
The work.
Ii is refreshing to observe that SUI
preme judges quite often have their dis
i ~ Il
70 have a dissenting opinion every day
or two, but of late years dissenting
opinions have been scarce. Whether the
Judges lack independence or their work
IS So hard that individuals have not the
, time To GO into all the cases remains to
} te demonstrated; but the fact is that
since the days of the late Judge Beck
dissenting opinions are not common in
the court. Yesterday. however, Justice
! Ladd wrote a brief but pointed dissent
To decision which WAS presented at
! great length by Justice MoClan. 1t was
the case OF Madison vs. the Garfield Coal
Company involving damages for use of
! land for coal mining. the amount
/, claimed being s17,50o The majority
, opinion was that under the contract held
by the coal company il had right to do
Il that Whlcn was complained pi. lue
cburt also held there mad been prior
adjudication of the case. Justice Ladd
r added this to the opinion of the court:
III is quite enough that this contract
has been once construed, and as the for
,ner adjudication is conclusive and may
not be questioned in this action the first
portion of the opinion Is superiiuous and
, Iinvolves the evident inconsistency of de-
Il ~ T,,tf ~.
, aa;ud!catad in another ACTION. ] cen-
. cur in the conclusion reached in the sec
. ond portion of the opinion only
/ The supreme court laid down rule in
s a slander case before il which is worth
knowing by persons who are sometimes
} moved to the use of outrageously inde-
cent language toward Others. This was
a Story county case, that of Craver IS.
:. Norton. in which Judgment had been
J rendered for the plaintiff on an acton
, for slander. 1t seems that the plaintiff.
woman, interposed when her father
and the defendant were quarreling and
tried to stop the quarrel, but the de-
fcndant turned on her and poured forth
G voley of vile epithets, with oaths and
trimmings The court entered into a
lollS ulStuSsi'll ~ III VIE ~! t'it
, foul words used toward the woman. as
!, to whether they We're slanderous and de-
famatory. and in conclusion said:
I'm this state eXtrinsic facts for tEe
!, purpose of showing matters were spoken
i'll defamatory Sense need not be al
legged; and when the language is ambig
uous in meaning and susceptible to q
use in defamatory sense 1t is perlnissi-
bic for those hearing q testify TO their
understanding o. the mtanag With
which it was enaslnyed. That such
words as We're spoken naghi By reason
o. the time, place and attendfre circuin-
stances, be taken o impute want oi
chastity seems to be Recognized by all
the authorities. and It was for The jury
to say whether under the evidence in
this case those hearing understood them
TO be Intended in that sense by the de-
fendant. When persons indulge in Ian
guage SO reprehensible that no occasion
can well be conceived Of justify ing us
use and which, as applied to Aumar
being has no well-defined meaning. thy
are not in a situation to complain ii j,
y shals be taken In the worst sense posi-
" ~ sssqs sa2s strz;