CHAPTER XXIV.

Tut Courts oF OrEGoN, Montana, AND BritisH CouumBta, condensed from
the Press, with explanations, ete,

x Tue revenue of the county is absorbed by the expenses of the justices’
courts, very few even of those most interested, and whose attention has
been called to the matter, realize the enormous amount expended in pay-
ment of fees and expenses in these courts,

It is not an uncommon thing that a preliminary examination, result-
ing in the committal of a criminal for trial, cost the county several hundred
dollars, [besides what is often bled from more or less innocent victims by
court lawyers. |

An uninformed observer would naturally suppose that so simple a
matter as preferring a charge, issuing a warrant, a brief inquiry into the
facts, and holding the accused to answer, would be a comparatively inex-
pensive proceeding, but the fact is otherwise. When to the amount con-
tributed by the county for the maintenance of these retail justice shops is
added the cost of a vast amount of ‘itigation directly encouraged, if not
instigated by them, the aggregate is appalling.

It is the duty of taxpayers to make a diligent inquiry into the cause
or causes of this state of affairs, and if possible, to devise a remedy. [The
remedy is to keep the gang out of office. |

There is great competition for this ruinous business, for, while each
precinct has its justice, the jurisdiction of the said justice extends over
the whole county, and they consequently become so many competing
shops. The plaintiff who, out of the entire list, selects a single justice [or
isa brother in the gang] before whom to bring his action, is a customer
entitled to consideration and is rewarded by a judgment in his favor.

Every shyster at the bar has his favorite justice, and expects successin
proportion to the amount of grist he can bring to the mill.

Actions are brought on the theory that the plaintiff [if a mason]
always wins, which never would stand the test of proof.

Eyery justice has his constable and two or three hangers-on [all
masons] ready to be sworn as specials, all actually hunting up business
for their shop.

The fee system contributes largely to the present state of affairs. If
the justice and constable had each a salary sufficient to compensate them
for theirservices, and fees were paid into the treasury, it is possible that
there might be less diligence in creating business, but in all probability
noone would be loser thereby, and matters in which justice and publie
interests are really involved would not suffer for want of attention.”

(461)

Y. Ss
%y Vy % Y Wig WV
S adh WV wo A \~ oe
yp ONY Ah
V4 as \o € ¢ .
VI <oo
Sf %<%
25 daaa : =I)
> G) ae 23394353 =m ~ [= a
it Ce ere an nO
3" i PEE
s = = SS ac?) a.
= SR 5
AL
> S
%, ~
3?" Lp
> a> 3 AN aes ke IN
> on N G be _ ls

et

eA anni ram es cena mags apenas

en eee

races

462 Courts IN OrnEcon, Monrana AND BritisH CoLtumBIA.

6 November 25th, 1886,
To the Editor:

In your paper you seem to lament that certain phases of the proceed-
ings in regard to the Balch children have never been examined in court,
Several years ago those points were presented to and urged upon the cir-
cuit and supreme courts as the principal points in the then pending Balch
case, But each court declined to pass upon those points, though pre-
sented by proper pleadings, in a proper suit, and with voluminous testi-
mony to support them. The cirenit court went so far as to decide once
on the case, that the acts complained of were fraudulent, but it afterwards
went back of this decision in the same case, and threw the whole case out
of court on some pretense of a defect inthe pleading which had never been
raised or suggested by the attorneys upon either side in the ease, and had
never been previously suggested by the court, though a second argument
of the case was had in the same court by the court’s order. On appeal to
the supreme court, the pretense upon which the case had been thrown out
by the lower court was deemed so trivial, that it was never mentioned by the
court or attorneys on either side.”

* % *

‘The bank thief has been sentenced to a term of one year in the
penitentiary. Yesterday the wretched burglar, who entered a house at
night in the hope of being able to extract some loose change from the
pockets of the owner's pants, and got instead a well deserved charge of
bue!shot in the back from his gun, was sentenced to a period of nine
years in the penitentiary, and every good citizen applauded the decision
of the Judge. To-day, a man who has systemetically stolen for a period
of months, until the sum stolen aggregated several thousand dollars, is
given one year. What sort of pressure and how much of it to the square
inch was brought to bear upon Judge [Mason]?

‘Judge to [odd-fellow].—‘ You stand charged with appropriating
money belonging to the depositors in your bank; are you guilty or not
guilty.’ Odd-fellow.—‘ Your honor, I did borrow $9,000, merely to spend
on a pleasure trip.’ Judge.—‘Only borrowed it? I thought as much;
but owing to our miserable laws, I will be compelled to ask you to change
your residence to Salem for one short year. In the meantime, before your
departure, I would be happy to have you call and take dinner.’ ”’

‘Judge [Midnight] to Workingman.—‘ Well, sir, you are charged
with attempted burglary, what have you got to say ?’”

Workingman. —‘‘ Nothing, your honor, but that I had been sick for :
long time, not able to work, and my wife and babies were starving. I
went to the baker shop and knocked at the door, intending to ask the
baker for a loaf of bread, Not receiving any answer to my knock, I tried
to open the door and was arrested.”

Judge.—‘‘You miserable whelp, you are guilty of the crime of
attempted burglary, I sentence you to the penitentiary for nine years.
We must make an example of such as you. The courtstands adjourned.”

YLUMBIA.

25th, 1886,

of the proceed-
mined in court.
upon the cir-
n pending Balch
nts, though pre-
oluminous testi-
; to decide once
but it afterwards
ie whole case out
h had never been
he ease, and had
second argument
y. On appeal to
been thrown out
» mentioned by the

one year in the
itered a house at
change from the
eserved charge of
a period of nine
ided the decision
‘tolen for a period
ousand dollars, is
bf it to the square

ith appropriating
rou guilty or not
, merely to spend
hought as much;
sk you to change
time, before your
inner.

you are charged

d been sick for a
vere starving. I
ding to ask the
my knock, I tried

of the crime of
for nine years.
ands adjourned.

Courts IN OrnEGon, MonTANA AND BritisH CoLuMBIA. 463

‘*THIs QUESTION AWAITS AN ANSWER.
Fesrvuary 7th, 1887,
To the Editor:
Would any law the Iegislature can enact have any effect except to get
up big suits, so long as the [masonic] ring owns the supreme court, and one
of its judges is the ex-Governor under whose ruling the ring gets its title?”

* *
*

‘‘Some little time ago H.. was arrested and charged with entering
the house of B.. with burglarious intent. He was held to answer before
the Grand Jury, which body indicted him on a charge of ‘invading the
premises with the object of committing rape.’’ H.. was allowed to plead
guilty of simple assault, and was fined $50, The prevailing opinion of
persons who claim to know is, that there never was ANYTHING in the case.
[To simply charge an innocent person with such a crime as rape, blindly
prejudices so many of the unthinking cattle against him that with a pros-
tituted court and press he can easily be railroaded through to prison under a
long sentence for pillage or revenge. I know of such victims—one per-
sonally, with a large family. His innocence was established beyond dis-
pute; the witnesses against him recanted and fled the country; the people
and jury petitioned for his release. His masonic Excellency (the Gov-
ernor) was playing cards and drinking whiskey when the petition was
offered to him; he replied, to ‘ bring it to his officethe next day when he had
time to spend on such business,’ at which time he said, ‘we have a good
judiciary,’ and without the [masonic] Judge the petition is worthless, with
the [masonic] Judge I will ‘ consider’ it ; his honor (?) declined to ‘inter-
fere with the cause of justice,’ and the victim is left to languish seven
years in prison. ]

‘* ANOTHER INVESTIGATION, ” .

‘Witness testified that Judge [Links] was under the influence of
liquor so often that business suffered; had seen him go to sleep on the
berch while important cases were being heard. The delay in appointing a
successor to Judge Links cost the district from $75,000 to $100,000, and
had also cost the Government a large sum.

Ex-Chief Justice Blank was also before the committee; he testified that
Judge Links gambled while holding a term of court; that he played poker
for money one Sunday afternoon, while during the morning of the same
lay he had delivered an address before a Sunday school. On other occa-
sions he played ‘stud’ poker and faro for money, liquors and drinks, and
had been at a dance given by a colored woman of bad repute, and was fre-
quently drunk when on the bench.”

|The following is a sample of the proceedings of a miners’ court with-
ont any law-books, blackleg ‘bar,’ or other needless expense. |

“The court in his charge to the jury said that they must strip the
case of technicalities, regarding no law but right and wrong, no test but
common sense, They listened with approval, and at once proceeded to

contr Paes pee ROS mE En Re Nn

464 Courts IN OrEGON, MONTANA AND BritisH CoLumBia.

a

disagree on a vital point ; some wanted to hang Sim, who had been proven
guilty of bribery, while several wanted to hang Alcalde Rogers. This dan-
gerous phase soon passed away ; the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff,
and left the sentence with the court, where it evidently belonged. Judge
Hayden then, amid breathless silence, announced his decision—Sprenger
was to be reinstated in all his former rights, as half owner of the cabin,
tools, provisions and claim, and Sim was ordered to pay the costs of his
partner's sickness. The court then adjourned.

But some of the evidence offered had revealed so much rascality and
malfeasance on the part of Alcalde Rogers, that none of the miners were
satisfied to let him longer hold the office he had so disgraced.”

‘“THE WALKER-TEAL CASE,

James D. Walker, a citizen of San Francisco, loaned to B. Goldsmith
$100,000 for which he gave his note, of which the following is a copy:

Portuanp, Oreg., August 19th, 1874.
Two years after date, without grace, for value received, I promise to
pay James D, Walker, or order, $100,000, with interest theron at the rate
of 1 per cent. per month until paid. Interest to be paid monthly, and if
there be default in payment of interest for the period of twenty days, then
the whole sum, principal and interest, shall, at the option of the holder of
this note, be immediately due and payable. (Signed) 3B. Goups»tu.

To secure this note Teal and Goldsmith put up a large amount of real
estate, transferring it to Hewitt as trustee, with an agreement that if said
note became 30 days overdue, Hewitt shall, after demanding pay ment, sell
the land on 30 days’ notice. At the end of two years (Aug. 19th, 1876),
$96,750 of the note remained unpaid. On October 18th, 1876, Goldsmith
and Teal obtained a second agreement for an extension of time for one
year from that date for the payment of the note, and Teal and Goldsmith
put up more real estate as before. The second agreement was signed by
both Teal and Goldsmith, and recited the first agreement and note, and
provided that in consideration of the extension G. and T. ‘undertake and
agree that the said G. will promptly pay” the interest when due and the
principal at the end of the year, and that, in default of payment of prin-
cipal or interest, the whole debt shall become due, as provided in the first
agreement and note (i. e. the principal being unpaid at end of the year
Hewitt shall, when it is 30 days over due, sell on 30 days’ notice; and if
the interest be in default, whole debt to be due at the option of Walker.
The agreement then declares—that Walker agrees to extend the time for
payment of the principal and interest one year or until default in payment
of interest, and no longer; but if default be made in payment of interest,
the whole debt with then accrued interest ‘shall become due and payable
as in said note specified,’ (i. e. at Walker’s option.) ‘It is distinctly under
stood and agreed by the parties hereto, that theagreement of August 19th,
1874, is not annulled, vacated or set aside by the execution of this agree-

OLUMBIA.

iad been proven
gers, This dan-
for the plaintiff,
elonged. Judge
»ision—Sprenger
er of the cabin,
the costs of his

ich rascality and
the miners were
ced.”

1to B. Goldsmith
‘ing is a copy:

ist 19th, 1874.
ived, I promise to
theron at the rate
ad monthly, and if
twenty days, then
on of the holder of
B. GoupsMITH.

arge amount of real
eement that if said
hding payment, sell
s (Aug. 19th, 1876),
h, 1876, Goldsmith
sion of time for one
eal and Goldsmith
ent was signed by
ment and note, and
T, ‘undertake and
when due and the
f payment of prin-
brovided in the first
ht end of the year
ays’ notice; and if
b option of Walker.)
extend the time for
default in payment
ayment of interest,
e due and payable
is distinctly under-
ent of August 19th,

ution of this agree

Courts IN OREGON, MonTANA AND British Cotumaia. 465

ment, except in so far as the same may conflict with this agreement; in all
other respects the two instruments are to be taken and construed together.’

Default was made in the payment of interest Jan. 21st, 1877. Plain-
tiffs commenced suit to foreclose Sept. 26th, 1877, one month before the
year expired, in the exercise of their option. Defendant (Teal) claimed
his property was discharged because Hewitt and Walker did not commence
to sue him soon enough; and also claimed that he was not a guarantor of
the note under said contracts. Boise heli, Teal’s property was bound; but
Kelly and Prim decided that the property wis discharged from paying the
debt, because Walker did not commence suit against Teal and Goldsmith
soon enough. By which decision Walker lost, perhaps, $50,000.”

‘Tt is not a little singular that all these decisions are made practically
to favor the vicious and the criminal. There is not one, we venture to
say, among all the decisions of our Supreme Court, that has rendered
justice more certain or more decisive. These technicalities are always
found to favor the side of injustice [and Masonry], always tend to override
equity, are always found to shield [linked] criminals from the just punish-
nent of criminality.

This kind of thing will doubtless make lynching more frequent.”’

‘*Monry, Masonry, AND A SANDBAG,

Bridget Blank is happy now, and can boast of being the first woman
who has went from the United States to the Queen’s dominions and run a
Jury to suit herself. Bridget and her husband went to Victoria some time
ago to reside. She then left her husband there, to attend to business,
while she came to P. to look after her intezests here. A few days after
she left, her husband killed a man with a sand-bag. He was arrested, and
Bridget was notified of the fact. It did not take her long to act. She
quietly gathered up $30,000 of her accumulated wealth, and, boarding a
steamer, announced her intention to clear her husband, if it took every
cent of it. The charge of the Judge to the Jury was almost unreasonably
strong, but notwithstanding that facta verdict of ‘ Not guilty’ was brought,
which so exasperated the Judge, that he ordered the prisoner turned loose
and advised him to ‘sandbag the Jury,’ much to the amusement of Bridget,
who coyishly closed one of her eyes, and remarked soto voce that Ireland

had made one portion of the Queen’s dominion very tired, that she
knew of.”

. ce OEE: ICR EAA 8 ee

mioaenradanteeie rss