The Black Hills union. [volume] (Rapid City, Pennington County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1889-1904, 1903-10-23
The GILBERT CASE

s&1YIT. II HJ9gEyT5 IL
the GIL BERT CASE
DIR. Gilbert HE'D up5nfeus hast
week after the publication OF the
article which took the stand that.
Mrs. Gilbert was not d dffuhnkksard.
and accused Us 81 being p5,reiiuitdieced
e the matter.
s.. He said our statements placed
him In q very wrong light and were
not borne out ~ the best informed
persons nor by the verdict he re-:
.ceived.asa I'D S4aS I&5a339
anNow when any mar tells us we
are prejudiced without reasons or
ssinfers that wetwould take advantage
sofa mans simply because wef1are
Z funninga newspaper and hesis not,
tlhe hits vs. in % tender spot. 1aOur
policy hasaalways been and shall
3t'ontinues aot kbe, that every person
shall be tr, atedfairly according to
the bestn}nfi6our liability and these
columns 80 always open to the
defensesof anyone who feels himself
,awronged orgill treated by US.
We statedlast week we did not
believe Mrs. Gilbert was intoxicated
at Hotel Harvey when she caused
the disturbance there some. two
weeks ago. Before making that
statement we interviewed four per-
fisons--7three Of whom saw her inside
OF an hour before the fracas& and one
who was in the Harvey lobby when
she was led out of the dining room.
These four persons all stated they
did notbelieve she was drunk. We
also learned she had three settings
for photographs about aa hour be-
fore supper.
Upon this evidence we based our
statement that she was not intoxi-
Gated. 70 prove to the doctor cur
good intentionsawe willingly inter
viewed six more responsible persons
who were actually in the dining
room at the time. Four Of these are
positive she was drunk or crazy and
Two did not know. whether she was
drunk or not, but said her a:tions
were unladylike, We must conclude
fromthis that she was either drunk
or icrazed an the time. Another
party who YVES at Ythe, train that
night says she staggered percepitab.
" and ltI' used most prsoifrane language.
We sympathised with Mrs. Gil
bert Tor two reasons, One WAS be.
cause she was q woman and the
other because every one seemed
~againstsher. We shall always de-
fend what we may consider the tsun-
der dog" to the last trench.
sstlincssNrfting j q Mrs, Gilbert's
sSASesfs1QsgsbnSRgSSks a most important
sssdeciisio n ghase btSensfHadet
aas Decided that Mrs.
4 HlehgS1SSSsjs an hibitual drunkard and
'sffof tHiis, reason granted her husband
q diHqfGe. The court knows more
ah9htst1is case than we do. 1t has
been more or less familiar with the
evidsnGe for the past three years.
Ws5htIye been here but three months.
InIStewo Of these things we do not
feelljlssiied in dissenting from the.
CcyIlrltsn decision.
MtSssaG. Is undoubtedly addicted
TO the Excessive use Of i~ntoxicants.
Whallilees AZ il q matter Of opinion as TO.
whAther she was dunk 81 " ctazed SsatI
thslHatney that niRh sitiisa mat tar
81 Ktpfpyen eyidenes hat che lbs
besH hHpnk at other times. The
eyiasHcs also proves that she belab-
orsatIe doctor with clubs and
LANDED on him, 50 to speak, with
teaSA
THE ctpr9s from Tia vail F,eI1shia.
prIYatero9Ens here sud siispeaf88e
hoselp n linen, whenth8linsnl hdidnit
lneedt Thaahs been UP
against ! saaK prpop,olssitled thar