The Ward County independent. [volume] (Minot, Ward County, N.D.) 1902-1965, 1910-08-25

tempted to mislead the people, and
have been caught with the goods.
Murphy says that the $254.3S re-
funded him. by the county commits
siOners was because the states at
torney advised the commissioners
that this sum was not due, being H.
legally collected" States Attorney
Nash says he gave no such advice,
and the matter was never referred to
him for an opinion. Mr.. Nash never
gives an opinion upon matter of tax
es that is not in writing, and filed
with the board. A written opinion is
not on file. believe Mr.. Nash rather
than Murphy.
Murphy says he never met me un'
til ! came to Minot eight years ago.
Let me refresh. his memory. This
man Murphy met me many times We
fore I came to Minot to reside, l
was chairman of the committee Or
credentials of the Republican state
convention held in Fargo in 1898,
when this man Murphy and John
Bradley appeared before that commit
tee with forged and faxed proxies,
seeking to be seated in that conven-
tion as representatives of Ward
county, against George w. Wilson and
w. j. Carroll, who headed the right
fully elected delegation. 1t is need.
less to say that the Wilson delega-
tion was seated. Murphy charges
that was political orphan when I
came to Minot. Possibly. But at
that time was member Of the Re-
publican State Central committee
from the Ninth Legislative district,
Fargo, and had been for four years,
from 1898 to 1902, and resigned as
such member, after coming to Ward
county, for the reason that HAD re-
moved from the district represented.
Murphy says "went out Of the Unit
ed States land office under black
cloud,' which he does not think 1t
necessary for him to explain now.
Does any person believe Murphy
would think it unnecessary to ex-
plain that would reflect upon me or
my record while in that office? It Is
needless for me to deny this despica-
Bile insinuation. 'Murphy's own rec
ord as an official and as liar is suf-
fcient refutation of his perhdious in
situations against me.
The major" will not even quote
correctly the opinion Of the SUPP eme
court. He says, "The supreme court,
in unanimously dismissing the case
Estate vs.. Murphy said this: The
improperly of this case cannot be
doubted. Authority upon the subject
cannot be cited, for parallel to this
proceeding (meaning the damnable
proceeding incident to the case), We
firmly believe cannot be found in all
the judicial history of the country"
Now, the facts are, that Chief JUS
tice Morgan wrote the opinion and it
was concurred in by Judge Fske,
granting a new trial and remanding
the case for further proceedings
not dismissing the case-upon the
ground that the trial court had er-
red in speaking to the jury after the
case had been given to the Jury.
Judge spalding concurring specially,
commenting on certain questions pro-
pounded by the prosecution, which he
held to be improper, used the Ian
guage Incorrectly quoted by Murphy.
This is tho exact language used.
"The improperly Of this line OF
questions cannot be doubted. Author
ity on the subject cannot be cited,
for a parallel to this proceeding, we
firmly believe cannot be found In all
the judicial history of this country. "
Not the damnable proceeding. mel