The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1913-01-30

- ~ u &Plolittb
to succeed Judge Garland. He form
erly having been the general attor-
ney OF IL OF the railroads involved
in the litigation. very properly de-
clined TO sit as Judge in the hearing
ON the masters report, so that ii be
came necessary for the senior circuit
judge OF this district. who was none
other than Judge Sanborn himself,
who decided the Minnesota rate cas-
es so adversely to our interests. TO
either himself hear the motion on
the confirmation of the masters re-
port i'm the South Dakota rate cases.
or designate a Judge for that pur-
pose.
Wait Oh Higher Court.
ut may be easily understood that
the attorney general was not overly
anxious to have Judge Sanborn or
any judge named by him, pass upon
the confirmation of the masters re
port in our cases, in view of his de
cision Just recently rendered over
turning the regularly recognized
rules OF judicial decisions in such
cases, and which was absolutely add
verse TO the contention OF the state
in our cases. Further, it was the sue-
gestion of Judge Sanborn, himself,
that no judge be assigned until the
supreme court passed upon his de
cision in the Minnesota rate cases
involving the same questions. If amy
evidence is needed in regard TO this.
ii viii be found in the following eX-
cerpt from a letter written by Judge
Elliott to the attorney generals Of
flee, under date OF July 10. 1911, as
follows:
1 am just in receipts OF a letter
from Judge Sanborn in which he sug-
gests thar the South Dakota rate cas-
es are OF the same nature as the
Minnesota rate cases, the Missouri
rate cases and the Arkansas ate
cases, and will in the end be govern
ed, so far as rules of law and ac-
counting are concerned, by the decis-
ion OF the supreme court in those
cases, 1t is assumed that the supreme
court will reach these cases some
time next winter, and it is his judg-
ment that it would be best TO allow
these cases TO await the determine
tion Of the other cases by the sp-
preme court.
"A copv OF which letter Will be
fonnd i'm The attornev generals re-
mort for 1871 and 1872 ON mage @.
"This statement is NOT in amy n
a defense of the attorney general. |
am not Interested i'm a defense of him
and, so far as | know, he needs no
defense in connection With this mat
ter. But | do not propose to let the
Areus-Leader. as the representative
Of the interests profiting by the de-
rays IN queslloh' Sel away WIN iVs
h!srepftsentalioh5 OF lhe cause o.
9ucl oelaN'
y Vicious Influence.
1T is strange. indeed. that the
MANAGEMENT of a paper which might
be so influential for good as the
ArQus-Leader. will persistentlv pro
stitute such Influence as it has to
serve special interests. Whenever such
interests come in conflict With the
interests of tha people. In this regard
M least if has The merit OF being
consistent. personally like its edit
and regret more than ] can tell.
that he PERSISTS in this attitude but
whenever any of these questions arise
he is ready by spacious and misleau-
ing statements. stating half truths
SOME untruths. 10 mislead the
public i'm regard to the facts. and do
the bidding OF such special interests
i'm their determination 10 eve a
adius1ment in behalf OF AN the
people. Thus his paper which might
a great power for good. is instead
a limited power for harm.
n.to,a., ,,r,,,d
."' W n,
we SPINS VI 80 ~
Niose " ivy iesl'i" "'
""''" vas p"99eo /" i"N 'NN"7
NV w ~
NV o'"i 'No"N'n7
w w. anu oHc n"ii 'cn'' pei w
w many o'"el avs u
VI uie puoi.N' 'he
"eehs iJiel iSu W ne a. ~
oi ,ia' seosiol 40 an al'Nilpt "
isnei 'ie i~'liiuau9 ~ D'o"Sn' '.s
pa.'el'es Vi liu'Vuie anu 'onuSl"''
Vloh TO pear lloln NdIious "nslss ae
e.eiE poS9ipie oppoil'nt'S NV