The independent., 1903-10-15

shows another phase OF the judges
character
This was case brought to recover
de re 9es ffrcs:.: the the y 2 p. &c. Ter
the death of mar by the name Of
Niels Rasmussen. Rasmussen was a
passenger on the U. P. read. AS the
train swept by one of the stations he
recognized friend on the platform.
He stuck his head out of the windows
to salute the friend and wave good
bye. While he was in this attitude his
head came in contact with the mail
crane standing close to the track.
Shortly afterward he died from the
injury sustained. 1t was contended
that the mail crane was too near the
track and that the company was neg
ligent in maintaining it, there. The
company said that Rneser was negli-
gent in sticking his head out of the
window. A majority of the supreme
court took the railroad company's
view of the case, but Judge Sullivan
refused to do SO, putting his conclu-
sion upon the ground that Rasmussen
had done only what nine men out Of
have done under the same circum-
stances.
In disposing of the language the
Judge used the following truthful Ian
guage:
In dealing with cases of negli-
gence, judges are, am disposed to
think, too much inclined to take
themselves as standards by which
to measure the conduct of all classes
and conditions of men. CommeI-
surate care in given case is apt to
be what they would have done. They
are accustomed to travel, and under
stand the dangers of the road; they
are unaffected by novel situations;
their native enthusiasm has been
chilled by contact with the world;
they hold themselves in leash, and
wave no improvident salutations to
acquaintanceS or friends. They are
well-posed, circumspect, and delib-
crate; they ars examples of correct
conduct; but, however much it is
to be regretted, their ways are not
the ways of exultant youth, nor of
the man with the hoe Carriers of
r. l. & P. r. r. Co. VS.. Zernecke, so
Neb. $50, 81 N. w. 26, SIS L. r. A.
610, are insurers; they charge for
the risk they assume, and there is
consequently no reason why the law
imposing liabilit, upon them should
be enforced with reluctance. In ac-
tions brought to recover indemnity.
courts have, it seems to me, no call
to put harsh construction upon the.
plaintiffs conduct in order to tenn
per the statute with natural justice ;"
Another case along these lines is the
case OF G., B. & @. VS.. Martelle, 81. N.
W. Rep. 364. (This was discussed last
week.-Ed. Ind.)
In the case of Western Union Tel.
Co. VS.. Village of Wakefield, 95 N. w.
$50, we again see the judges SYM
pathy with the people. The village of
Wakefield levied an income tax on
the Western Union Telegraph COM
pany. 1t was contended that the
company was not subject to the tax.
The supreme court agreed with the
company and Sullivan dissented, held
the ordinance levying the tax to be
t0llu 0Au otdIC LILO lCQoOAo tACl CAOA
with his usual force and clearness.
In the case of State vs.. Kennedy, be-
Ing one of the cases with reference to
the Omaha police and fire commission,
the opinion was written by Judge Sui
Ivan. The closing paragraph of that
opinion .ould be carried at the mast
head of every paper in this state which
desires the judges reelection It
gives in clear, terse and forceful Ian
guage> the judges conception Of the
true attitude Of courts towards politi-
cal questions. In that case it was sug-
gested by republican counsel that pos
sibly the court being fusion would de-
eide in favor of the fusion board of
fire and police commissioners and
hence counsel took it upon himself to
warn the court against such course.
1t was in answer to this warning that
Judge Sullivan wrote the following
paragraph:
"The original brief of counsel for
respondents &C rveyed quite plainly
his apprehension that political con-
siderations might be a factor in the
decision of the case. No Judge con-
scious of his own integrity will list
en- to such suggestion. No self-re-