The weekly Ottumwa courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1857-1872, 1865-06-15
District Court--Spring Term, 1865.

Tenth day of the session.
! Court met pursuant to adjournment
opened and proceeded to business.
| Nos. 126 & 1s9-State of Iowa VS. JOSEPH
NJ. Rogers. Nuisance. Fined 81 and cost.
in each case, in consideration of his having
quit the business, and being an invalid tn,
fine was made light. , .. s...... .....
State of Iowa VS. Jonathan Taylor. In
dictment for burglary. Jury returned {
verdict of not guilty, and defendant dis
charged, attE .,.s.-......-..
State of Iowa VS. James Williams. In
dictment fol, bigamy. A. Harris for State
andiA. w. CASTOR for defendant. Jury
called and sworn, evidences heard, ant
cause submitted without argument as t.
the Jury, and after an absence of some q
minutes returned with verdict of guilty
Judgment on Saturday morning next. :.
State of Iowa VS. Mary Knowles. In
dictment for murder in second Degree
Jury called and empannelled, and cause
submitted upon the evidence of DIR. T. j.
Douglass. Immediate verdict of not gull
ty, and defendant forthwith discharged.
State of Iowa VS. George w. Ewing ct al.
Indictment for resisting officers. The de-
PENDANTS by their attorneys plead guilty,
and Saturday morning, next set for ,judg-
ment. sr-T ,Isfsy -a+, ....e .....s-. ....
State Of Iowa VS. Samuel Northcraft.-
Larceny. Jury called and sworn, and case
opened on part of plaintiff by A. Harris,
ESQ.,, and defendant by d. p Stubbs, ESQ.
327-Law. Enos Moore vsSeth Richards.
Dismissed as per agreement, and each par
tyto pay their own witnesses. s,. .-b,..
The jury in the case of State vs. Sheets.
was called into Court at 31p. M, and stated
that they could not agree upon a verdict,
and was by the Court, at the suggestion Of
the prosecutor, discharged; to all of which
defendants objected. -atsy..s ... r.
State VS. Samuel Northcraft. Larceny.
Special No. THE Jury in this case after
a short absence returned verdict of gull
ty, and Saturday morning set for judg-
ment. F#. .g.... .,.-.. ...-.fs r-.....-. -...s F..
--a g.a#.7 .f ,naan FRIDAY, June 9.
State VS. Samuel Northcraft- Larceny.
Special No. 2. Jury called, empannelled
and sworn, and proceeded 30 trial. A Har
ris, Attorney for State, and d. P. Stubs
for defendant. Trial had; verdict, guilty.
Judgment on Tuesday morning next.
State VS. Samuel Northcraft-Larceny.-
Special No. 8. Jury called; trial had ver-
dict guilty. Judgment on Tuesday next.
State VS. Edward Northcraft-Larceny
Special No. l. Jury called; trial had; ver-
dict, guilty. Judgment on Tuesday.
y
Special No2. Jury called; trial had YER
dict guilty. judgement on Tuesday next
State VS. Edward Northcraft-Larceny.
Special No 8. Jury called; trial had; ver-
dict, guilty. Judgement on Tuesday next.
State VS. Henry Cunningham-Nuisan
Arraigned, and trial set for Saturday
morning. .v1ga1.r. mar. ae,..ts,.,4 ... .....,.
State VS. Egglestone and Parker-Nui-
sance. Continued until next term.
I41 and 197-Stats VS. M. Henrich--Nui-
sance. Judgment for $500 and costs in
each case. .I -,ssF -.,.7r.,s.~ .r-. 7.. s..,
State VS. Morris Ulmer-Assault. Con-
tinued until next term. .t, a..,o-... r....-.
Continued under present recognizance un-
til next term. --~----.-----.
No. 3-State VS. III. e. T.. Brady-Recog-
nizance; arraigned; time given until morn
ing to plead. ufHs r rr
2O4-State VS. Levi Skinner-Trespass.-
Arraigned; time given until morning to
plead. ts. .- En snasF tan. ErfsT .
205-State vs VIM Burton-Tresspass.-
Arraigned and time given until morning
to plead. l'#7t
No. 12-Law s. w. Summers VS. Pitting-
ton-Suit on note. Continued until next
term. .##
No. 2O-Law. Hoard & Sons vas Goldman
Graves ct al-Contract. Continued for SER
vice. -Hs *5ast't aaF aEnT ."W
No 1i7-Law. e. Manning VS. Richard
Ross-Appeal. Continued untilnextterm.
No 13f-Law. F. Hagey VS. J. L. Boster
Appeal. Continued. $50 ad gh&
No 201-Law. A. b. Long Il Co. VS. The
opilus Blake-Continued. 1u.aEt
No 23s-Law. f. Manning VS. John Leg
gett-Petition. Continued. u =" iss#
No 249-Law. 8. r. Clark VS. John Moore
and J. w. Caldwell. Continued. ia1i
No 254-Law. John McGonegal rs Phe-
be Kane ct al. Continued. Eh 91H
No 25s-Law. A. Davidson VS. Mary Da-
wilson ct al-Partition. Continued.
No 293-Law. f. NJ. Cummings VS. 8. w.
III. L. Hearn-writ Of Error. Procedure
to issue within 90 days. .
No 3o1-Law. David Mullinix VS. James
Broherd-AppeaI. Continued.
No s0s-Law. James Warner VS. E. See
vers-Partition. Continued.
No sl0-Law. A. w. CASTOR VS. NJ. Well
man. Continued. .e
No 315-Law. State VS. Buchanan Ellis.
Forfeiture re-Recognizance. Continued.
No sl7-State VS. jacob Jones-R Rscogni-
zance. Continued. 4
No:s22--Law. Matilda Warner vs Jas.
Hull ct al. Continued. .-.
332-Law. n. A. Rayburn VS. Harmed a.
Dismissed at Plaintiffs
cost.
ss4-Law. W. II. Hayden & Co. VS. VIM
L. Baker-Attachment. Continued.
ss6-Law. Moses yogel VS. ]. A. Shelter
and E. J. McCormick-Attachme Con-
tinued for service. "a
3+-Law. Rebecca MsGrath VS. Hugh NJ
Observation-Disclosures. Dismissed at cost of
Plaintiff.
3F-Law. j. T. Hackworth, Admir- OF
James Pumroy VS. Grimes Pumroy-Suit
on note. Continued.
35l-Law. John Hendren VS. e. s. Huff.
stetter-Injunction. Dismissed.
S53-I4aw. G. ]. Briggs vs. Dennis a.
at cost Of PLAINTIFF
Judgment for costs.
abs-Law. Paris Caldwell va John Ford
and Wapello county. Continued.
NY. \