Weekly Trinity journal., 1858-04-24
Ninth Di-,ric, Cour,.---April Term.
Hon. VIM. p. DAINGERFIELD.

IR IeopteVs u r. Lynn, et dt-The following
named persons were drawn and accepted as iurorss
to try this case F. Hammond, John Haryev
Tracy Scofeld, Geo. Pettingill, David Evans, N
Stewart, John White, Thomas Young, Geo. Eaton
John Davis, r. Sproul, r. Mcfarland.
The Court was engaged all day upon this case
in hearing and determining preliminary motions
and objections to the admissability of certain pa.
pers as evidence.
Friday, April l6.
The People vs. C. +. Lynn, ct ala large
number of witnesses were examined, and Court
adjourned late in the day without having exam
ined all the plaintiffs witnesses.
Saturday, April II.
Court opened at the usual hour, and the death
of John M. Jarnagin having been announced, on
motion of j. S. Pitzer Esq, Court edjourned un
til Monday, the 10Th, out OF respect to the mem.
ory of the deceased.
Monday, April 10.
The People VS.. c. f. Lynn, ct al-This case was
resumed, and number of witnesses were sworn
both for plff's. and deft's. Counsel argue the
case and the jury after deliberation, submit the
following special verdict:
QUESTION 1. Was an election held on the 9Th
day Of September, 1854 in the county of Trim.
ity? i..
ANS. There was an election.
2. II there was an election held at that time,
who was elected Treasurer of the county of Trim
ity?
A. G. f. Lynn, County Treasurer.
3. Did he execute bond for the faithful per
formance of his duties as Treasurer?
! A. lie did execute bond
4. When was the bond introduced as evidence
executed
A. Executed on the 4th day of December, A.
d., 1855
8. Did j. A. Bachelor erase his name from the
bond introduced by the plaintiff, as evidence, and
sued on? Or, was it erased by another person
A. j. A. Bachelor erased it himself
hon l,o4
the bond ?
A. The names were all upon it at the time OF
the erasure that are upon it now
Z. Did or did not G. F. Lynn ever receive mo-
neys belonging to the State and If so, has he
paid the same over to the State or her offcersf
A. lie did receive money. He has not paid
the same 10 the State
8. How much money thus collected, if any, ia
due the State of California from G. f. Lynn?
| A. $13355 SO
! 9. Did c. f. Lynn ever execute other bonds as
his official bonds prior to the execution Of the
bond sued on
! A. He did.
10. Was there or not an order made by any
authority, that G. f. Lynn should execute an ad-
ditional bond to those introduced by the de-
fendant?
A. There was
IL. Was there any written order made for Lynn
to give new bond ?
A. There was
II. Was there ever an order cancelling the
bonds introduced by the defendants?
! A. There not.
| l3. Did he and his sureties execute the bond
offered in evidence and set forth in the PLAINTIFF
complaint,
A. They did.
From the above facts, as conclusions Of law,
the Court found the plaintiff entitled to iudg
ment against defendants, Lynn, II. NJ Chauncey.
VIM NJ. Lowe and S. S. Hovey, for the sum Of
Sl2O37 33, interest and costs and that defend
ants, II. j. Seaman, J. Chadbourne, NJ T. Craw.
ford and II. J. Howe be dismissed with their
costs of suit
Tuesday, April 20
The People VS.. c. r. Lynn, ct al.-Suit No p
The following named persons were drawn and
accepted as jury to try this cause L. Hunts
man, l.. Gage, b. f. Emery, r. Jones' r. Read
B. A. b. jenkins, D. Rowland, John Crowder, A.
Wormell, G. e. Rowe, b. Pettingill, Thomas
CrOwder.
large number Of Witnesses were examined on
behalf of plf. and deft, and the was submit
ted to the jury, who, after due deliberation, re-
port the following special verdict
QUESTION l. Was or not G. f. Lynn elected
Treasurer Of Trinity county?
ANS. Yes.
2. Did or not the said Lynn and suretes exc
cute the bond sued on and described in y1fs.
complaint?
A. They did.
g. As Treasurer of the county of Trinity did he
receive any moneys belonging to the State?
A. Tie did.
A. How much money, if any, did he receive
since the fling Of the bond sued on?
A. $3,977 81.
s. Has he or not paid any part of the said mo-
ney into the Treasury of State!
A. Has not.
g. If he has paid any money to the State since
the filing of the bond sued on, how much has
| been paid
A Paid none.
7. How much money, If any, is now due from
said Lynn to the State of California?
A S3,977 81. G. e. Rowe, Foreman.
From the above facts, the conclusions Of law
drawn by the Court are that the plff. should have
Judgment against G. F. Lynn, G. P. Rice, F. W.
Blake, John Cole, Fl. W. Anderson and VIM T.
Olmsead, and each of them, for $3,977 "a and
costs of suit.
H. Hooker VS.. E. C. Kelly & Co--Ordered, that
the Clerk publish summons to certain parties in
terested, TO appear within thirty days, and show
cause why plf should not have Judgment (Sum.
mons published in another column of this paper)
Also, notice ordered to be published, requiring
certain holders of eins against the Trinity Canal
Co. to appear before Hon. r. T. Miller, Commits
sloner in this case, on the 9Th day of May next,
and make due proof of their said leins.
In the matter Of TRINITY County VS.. John B.
My-Case argued and taken under adysement
and an order OF injunction made restraining the
Treasurer of Trinity county from paying GER
tain County Warrant drawn to the order of said
John Is. May, until the further order of this
Court.
The People VS. John p. Jones-Case argued and
taken under advisement, with the same order of
injunction as in former case.
Charles Thomas VS., Wm. CoUins.-Demurrer to
complaint argued and overruled. Deft. allowed
twenty days to file answer to complaint.
People VS.. c. f. Lynn, ct aL-In both cases
against @. +. Lynn, ct al, counsel for defts. gave
notice of motions for new trials.
Court then adjourned for the term
JOHN A. WATSON, Clerk.
IT is PITY that Merritts bill to loan the credit
of the State for 100000, to build line of steam
ships, is unconstitutional As it is, the State has