Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1906-11-03
THE INDEPENDENT
REFUSED TO PUBLISH !

The Independent las been publish
ing falsehoods, scurrilous matter in
abundance about Judge Reeder.
The Judge wished to answer some
of the lies published by the IDdepend-
ent but the editor refused, and re-
fused after the Judge offered to pay
for the space, Notwithstanding the
editor claims to publish paper, in
dependent and fair.
The following is what the Judge
asked to have published:
HAYS CITY, KAN. Oct. %, 1906.
To the voters of the 23rd Judicial District:
L have known for some time that
friends of my opponent were making
a seurrilous and unwarranIed attack
on me, but up to this time l have re-
Trained from answering anything
that they have charged against me.
MY ability. integrity and fitness for
the office of Judge are matters which
must be left to your judgment. Any
person who has business in my Court
juror, litigant or witness, can give
yon their opinion as to these matters.
The most unfair and untruthful
statements that have eyer been made
against any candidate are as follows:
1t is claimed that I have allowed two
exhorbitant fees in two partition
suits which were brought in my
Court.
In TIE case of Mormon VS.. Mormon,
it is charged that / allowed fee of
$1,000. and thereby robbed some heirs
out of their portion of the estate.
The facts are these: In this case Mr..
Ward. an attorney of Indiana, and
Mr.. Gilkerson, representing Mr.. Nor
mon, who owned 40 out SO shares of
the estate, and Mr.. Mormon agreed
with his attorneys, outside of Court,
that he would pay them a fee of
$1,000. This agreement was made out
side of Court between the parties in
terested in the case, and was incor-
porated In the Journal Entry and
handed to me for my signature at the
time the case was finally settled.
In the ease of Lent VS.. Lent, it is
charged that 1 allowed a fee of $3.50,
and an additional fee of ss5. In this
case Mr.. Burd, an attorney of New
York City, represented all of the AZ
heirs of Samuel Lent, and the heirs of
Lent agreed with Mr.. Burd, outside
of court, that his attorneys fees in
this case should be Just the amount
which was Incorporated in the Jour
nal Entry. This Jonrnal Entry was
made up, signed by the attorneys,
and presented to me for my sigma
ture. I had nothing whatever to do
with the determining of the fees
which the attorneys should receive.
in either of the cases.
Now, as to the truthfulness of the
above statements, / would respect
fully refer any person who cares to
know the truth in these matters to
Judge A. ID. Girkeson, of Hays City,
regarding. the fees in the Mormon
case, and also to FL. J. Penny, who
talked with Mr.. Mormon at the time
the case was settled; and in the case
of Lent VS.. Lent, will refer you to
Mr.. NJ. M. Fuller, of Ellis, who had
charge of Mr.. Lent's business previous
TO his death, and also looked after his
property until the final settlement of
that case, and was personally present
at the time of the settlement.
If any person interested in the
above case, had at the time, or even
since, made any objection to the al
lowance of the above fees, 1 would
have been compelled to have had tes-
timony submitted before me as to the
work done by the attorneys, and al
lowed the amount which the evil
deDce would warrant, but the heirs
in neither of the above eases have
ever made any objection whatever to
the manner in which their cases were
finally settled, and the only parties of
whom / know who seem to be aggriev-
ed by the settlement is Mr.. Ruppen-
thal's Committee in Hays City
Yours very respectfully,
J. III. REEDER.
barahv cerrifV that the holder OF