Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1904-03-24
C. Il. E. Boardman Found to
Have Caused Court Records
to BE Altered
COURT ORDERS THEM RESTORED
Motion of the Defendant, to That Ef-
feet, Sustained at an Interesting
Session Wednesday Afternoon-Bar
May Take Action in View of the Sen.
sational Developments.

bers of the Marshall county bar and
other spectators in court Wednesday
afternoon, after he sustained a motion
TO restore the record in the case o,
Barta LAMA US. the LeGrand Quarry
Company. The motion to restore was
made by the defendant, which alleged
that the records in the case had been
altered in several important details
without the knowledge Of the defend
ant or the court.
The LAMA case will be recalled as
enc OF the hardest contested of legal
court In recent years The action was
enc in which LAMA sought heav.
damages from the LeGrand Quarry
Company. of This city, for the loss OF
his eyes, caused by an explosion OF
dynamite at the companys quarries
The first action was brought about five
sears ago, and a verdict for $1,000 was
awarded the plaintiff by u jury In
Judge Burnham's court. The Judge set
aside the verdict. and the case was
again tried before Judge Burnham, and
another Jury returned verdict for the
same amount. The court again ex-
pressed his serious doubts as to the
plaintiffs right to recvoer, but mas
much as two juries had returned YER
diets of $4,000 each the court allowed
the case to so to the supreme court
The supreme court reversed the case
and said that the court should have
directed verdict for the defendant, or
The ground that no negligence was
shown on the part of the defendant
contributing to the injury of which the
plaintiff complained.
At the April, 1902, term the case was
again tried before Judge Burnham, and
1t the conclusion of the evidence the
court directed verdict for the de-
PENDANT, in accordance with the direc-
tion of the supreme court in the de-
PENDANTS appeal.
After the reporters notes taken by
Miss Agnes L. sMcKinnon, had been
ertified to by the reporter and Judge
Burnham, and filed in the office of the
clerk of the district court. and after
Miss McKinIaon had made the tran-
script from such shorthand notes taken
at the trial. and after such transcript
lad been certified to her and the judge
who tried the case. the attorney for
the plaintiff wrote the reporter, claim
ing that there were several mistakes
and omissions in the transcript and in
her shorthand notes. and asked her to
correct the same. Without notice 70
the other side, and to the judge, Miss
McKinnon did as Mr.. Boardman re-
quested, and in several respects alter
ed and changed her transcript, and
even changed her shorthand notes. ex
punging from the transcript several
pages and substituting several Other
pages in their place, the new pages
containing such changes and alterations
as she had been directed to make
The case was then pending in the
supreme court, on the appeal of the
plaintiff, from the last trial. The de-
PENDANT. on discovering the changes
and alterations in the transcript and
shorthand notes, filed motion in the
supreme court, asking for a dismissal
of the appeal, and IL such relief were
not granted, that the case In the SUI
Irene court be continued until the rec
order of the district court The SUI
IRENE court overruled the motion to
dismiss, but granted the motion 10
continue, and the question came up
in the district court Wednesday after
room upon the motion of the defend
ant, to restore the record to the con
dition in which 1t was before any
changes or alterations had been made.
The court sustained the motion of the
and made an order restoring
the record TO the condition in which it
was when the original transcript was
made.
Court Issues a Rebuke.
Judge BnrnAam issued rebuke to
the attorney who had caused the rec
ords to be altered, and severely scored
him. While guarded lin his language,
Judge Burrlham gave evidence of try
ing hard 20 contain himself, and not
speak out his Whole mind, in an effort
10 not make the situation any more
to thu attorney than pos,
sible. In ruling on the motion the
court said that the matter of a record,
filed in this way, was too sacred to be
with by any person whom
SiJeNeT, GSttl lHe JuuSG I'll Inc court.
The records should not be in any way
or altered, unless application
We're made to the judge, and with both
parties present, and then upon a fair.
open and impartial hearing On which
an parties interested appeared. No at
tormey hau the right to suggest even.
to reporter. that she should change
the record, or correct the same. or
that no reporter should, for a moment,
feel that she had any right to make
any change or alteration, In any rec
ord after i had been filed in the dis
trict court. The court said it WIS a
serious matter 10 do anything of this
kind, and lit was the duty of an at
torney to help preserve a record instead
of by any act or suggestion inducing
any one to alter it.
Judge Burnfian called attention to
the criminal part of the affair, and said
that 1T was forgery, on the part of the
reporter, and the attorney who induced
the action was an accessory. He took
occasion, however, to sustain Miss Nc
lInnon's action in way, by saying
that at the time the alterations We're
made the young woman was In poor
health, and by reason of such i'll health,
,aSiiy In illencad nArha ans She ha, n MT