The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-03-29
NO JUSTICE FOR
Mr.. VANDERBILT
If His Case is Tried in
State Court
HERE'S THE DECISION
Judge Pritchard Says That Local Pre-
judice Seems TO Exist to Such an
Extent as to Prevent Wander
biIt Obtaining a Fair Trial
in State Courts.
i'm State Courts.
(Special 10 News and Observer.l

(SpeCldl TO news anu ODSCTNCI'J
Asheville, n. c., March 2S.-Judge
Pritchard. of the United States Cir
cult Court. today rendered his decision
in the matter of remanding to the
VS.. George w. Vanderbilt.
Judge Pritchard refused to remand
the case, and this one together with
three other damage suits aggreGating
a total of $4,000 win be tried in thS
Federal courts. The suits against Mr..
Vanderbilt were instituted in the State
courts and later removed TO the Fed
eral Court upon application of the
plaintiff on the ground that local
prejudice existed against him and that
he could not get fair trial or justice
in Buncombe county. The cases came
on to remand and many affidavits were
submitted by both sides.
In rendering his decision, Judge
Pritchard decides that Mr.. Vanderbilt
cannot get an impartial trial in the
State courts and says:
After a careful examination of the
testimony offered the court is of opin-
ion that local prejudice exists to such
am extent as to prevent the defendant
from obtaining a fair and impartial
question which presents itself is.
whether the evidence offered by the
plaintiff is sufficient to overcome that
of the defendant, or at least to create
a doubt in the mind of the court as to
the sufficicncy of evidence upon which
the case was removed from the State
court. The petition. which is verified
alleges as a fact that on account of
prejudice the defendant cannot OBJ
ta iaIStipa in RtInppu1hp county Ty-
Swope in his affidavit. states of his
own knowledge that local preiu-
dice exists against the defendant and
in favor of the plaintiff and that he
believes in consequence of such preiu-
dice the defendant cannot obtain a
fair and impartial trial in the State
court J. Hardy Lee states that he
knows the condition of affairs in Bun
combc county and that the defendant
cannot obtain Justice on account of the
local prejudice. All Of the testimony
offered by the defendant is positive in
it's character. Much of the evidence
offered by the plaintiff is based on in
formation and belief.
"The plaintiff insists that it is shown
that there are thousands of citizens
in the county of Buncombe who if
called upon to serve as jurors in this
case in the State court would give the
defendant a fair and impartial trial.
This contention is undoubtedly true.
but at the same tirle it does not show
that there is no local prejudice against
the defendant in the county. The
court is well acquainted with the peo-
pie of Buncombe county and is salts
fed that, as q whole. they are as fair
and impartial in their dealings with
their fellow man as the people of any
other section of the United States. But
while this is the case. it does not
necessarily mean that there may not
he prejudice against the defendant in
the particular community in which he
resides for the reason stated by the pc
titioner.
Certain persons seek to create the
impression that the Federal court is q
foreign court and as such is hostile to
The interests of the people of the State.
There is absolutely no foundation for
such contention. The Federal courts
belong to the people of the State as
much as the State courts and were
created for the purpose of affording to
citizens of the various States facilities
by which they might have their con
troversies in cases like the one at bar
speedily and satisfactorily deter
mined"