Daily Iowa State Democrat. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1856-1859, 1856-12-10
Great Legal Controversy.
IMPORTANT TRIAL-NORTH versu,
SOUTH.


North, against very beautiful lady ma
med South, for the destruction Of GER
tain fence or boundary wall, and damage
fesant caused by the black cattle OF tho
Defendant straying into and enjoying
the green pasture land Of the Plaintiff.
The defence was an absolute denial OF
any cause Of action. Mrs. South nverred
that the land did not belong to Plaintiff,
but had been left for public use and ben
eft as an unreclaimed Common. Plain
tiff's privileges therein were not para
mount to her own, and her black cattle
were free to use the same, without hind.
rance or moleststion from Plaintiff or
any one in his behalf.
Eminent counsel appeared and conduct
ed the case Of the respective parties. The
enquirirs, during the progress Of the tri-
al took wide range. The most promi-
nent were:
Who put up the wall
Who knocked down the walls-includ.
ing an examination into the law of 'knook
down in general.
On this point, council cited Brooks, on
Capitol Offences; Law Of Summary pro-
ceedings; Cane, on Assault and Battery.
And, whether the knocking down the wall
was not nbolishing public nuisance?
The testimony, on the various points
involved, was somewhat conflicting, but
manifestly in favor Of South. North's
witnesses stated, that on the occasion Of
the marriage settlement Of certain Miss
Souri,, mutual relative Of the parties.
more than thirty years ago, it was agreed
between Plaintiff and Defendant the wall
should be put up. 1t remained up, after
being erected, until South's people
knocked it down.
On the part of the Defendant, many
witnesses conversant with all the facts
and circumstances Of the case, testified
that the wall had been Originally erected
az a matter of mutual convenience to
both parties. Within u very recent period.
North agreed that the settlers on, and
cultivators Of, the waite lands. should De-
trrmine for themselves whether or not
they should erect fences tn prevent the
incursion or pasturage OF the black cat
tie. He, the Plaintiff, having agreed to
remove the wall, wanted still to keep it
up, contrary to his agreement. North
and South's tenants had Joined together
and knocked the wall down as q useless
incumbrance.
When the testimony had proceeded
thus far, North could no longer keep 81
lent. He rosc up, and said.
"May it please the court did no.
consen, to the agreement about the cree
ton Of wall in the FIRST instance.
was opposed to it. directed nv agent S
to oppose it. But some Of them would
not listen to me, and carried the meas re
through. After the wall had been pu,
up, however, | did not caro- much abou,
it, one way nor the other, until'-
Here North was interrupted BY fidg-
city old fellow in court, namei Bolts,
who was very much excited while North
was speaking. He roared out.
81 think Mr.. North had better ST down
and not make fool of himself. lie
should leave his case 10 the hands of his
COUNSEL"
North, acting on this advice, took the
hint and sat down.
Mr. Wise, counsel for Defendant, then
addressed the court. He said:
81 hope this gentleman, Botts, shall
not be permitted to interrupt the pro-
ceeding in this manner. request that
he be not allowed to make any state
ments, unless on the stand as witness.
| propose to contradict and impeach bis
testimony, fully and conclusively."
Bolts attempted to reply, but was pre-
vented, by the Court commanding silence
and the constables giving him their im.
mediate attention.
After the examination of other wit.
nesses, FROM whom much important testi.
mony was elected in favor Of South, and
much sparring between counsel, as to the
admission and pertinency of certain doc
umentsry evidence, as far bach as 1887.
1920 and 1921 to 1850 and lS5l-the
counsel for the Defendant rested theil
case.
Plaintiffs counsel, by way Of rebuttipl
testimony, then called to the stand 40 &
witness.
John NJ. Bolts, who was examined al
great length, and occupied two whole
days in the giving Of his testimony. Thil
was owing to his great garrulity, and hi
statements about his own private and
personal quarrels lie seemed to DO anx
ious to prote himself q great origina
Know Nothing; He had long ago, he said
1 before tho time Of the great Henry Clay
/ declared, be knew s'no NoRrH, no SourH
no NorHINo.
He appeared to be particularly vindic
tive against Mrs South, from the circum
stance that che had withdrawn an sgeu
cy be had held in her behalf At Washing
ton. He said he knew that south wsnte,
the wall up and thsn she wanted it dowu
In fact, in his opinion, South did no
know her own mind on any subject. We
very tickle and ohangeable.
Gross.examined by Mr. Wee decline
to answer whether or not be has made
wager as to the result OF this cause, o
whether or not he is to be benefited
tho Plaintiff obtains verdict. Did kno,
o certain captain Tyler. Does not re
member whether or not he said he woul
head him off or die. II he did say 80
he must have headed him off, as hs
Bolts, is not dead yet, and does cot mea
to die at oil, il be can help il.
Knows thing or two about horses. :
Has large bet on horse race soon .
come of. Has bcsted his money on
bob-tsiled nag, called Phil More, againi
South's stud, Old Buck. Admits be ha
bedgei, so ~ to save himself on Woo
| y Horse, owned and entered for th
same race BY Abby Lisbon. 10 yer
friendly with Abby. Thinks Mrs. Sout
quite jesloas Of her on bic accouu,
Feel. siseslt qait. fsisty. Cossids'