The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-09-29

amount of S123, 1000, was wrong
against, the best interests of all of the
school children of the state of Kansas,
and of all that are to come hereafter.
That said school fund commissioners.
were the recipients of the electoral ia
vor of a majority of the voters of
confidence in the integrity of each of
them, and their ability to discharge the
duties of their respective offices. That
is to say, that they had elected the said
]. r. Burrow to the office of secretary
of state, and the said I. L Dayhoff to
the office of superintendent of public
instruction, and the said c. c. Coleman
to the office of attorney general; and
they as such officers ex-officio We're
the cuStodiauS of the school fund of
Kansas,-a fund set apart for the edu-
cation and enlightment of the young
of the state, and as such should have
been sacred from the clutch of Greed,
and beyond the reach of Gain, whore
only giltedged securities, with no faint
Of fraud or doubt about payment should
have found Judgment.
That such officers, in the discharge
of their duties as such, should act OPP
emily and above board, counting the
fullest criticism of their official acts.
and yet such was the estimate placed
upon their own conduct in this trans
action, by themselves and their con-
frereS, that every effort was bespoke
and employed to keep the knowledge
of said transaction from the public. All
of which facts, coming to the knowl-
edge of the defendant the article COM
planned of was published as a matter
of news, and for the information of the
readers of his paper, THE Topeka
State Journal and as a matter of
duty to the public, and without malice
or illwill toward the plaintiff.
That the said officers are all candi-
dates for reelection to their respect
i've offices at the coming November
election. in this year OF our Lord 19V4,
and as such. presumably challenge the
attention of the people of the state of
Kansas to the manner in which they
have discharged the duties OF their
respective offices in the past, and the
defendant, in the furtherance of such,
published the foregoing facts, in order
that the said school fund commission
ers have the benefit thereof, and the
people might know in what manner
they were conducting themselves in
the discharge of their duties as such.
If their conduct, as disclosed IN the
above statement of facts. was injurious
to them in their capacity as state oft1-
GERS seeking reelection to the offices
they now hold, the faults with them,
and not with the defendant IT, on
the other hand, their conduct in the
premises was Iaudatory, then they have
no right to complain because of the
publication of said facts Their acts
as public officials, seeking reelection,
are proper subjects for investigation
and commentator or criticism. If
their said conduct is worthy of COM
mendation, then they have no cause
of quarrel with defendant for publish
ing the facts. If subject to criticism,
then it was the duty of the defendant.
as such publisher. to state the facts
for which he is guilty of no wrong.
Wherefore said defendant, having
fully set forth the facts and circum
stances under which such article was
published, prays that the same may be
adjudged a full and complete juStifica-
ton; and that he may have judgement
for costs.
w. P. HACKNEY,
J. G. WATERS,
B. P WAGGENER,
Attorneys for Defendant.