The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1874-10-16
DISTRICT COURT.

The following proceedings Of the Dis
trict Court are continued from last week
Aldrick & Co. We. s. TIlston ct al
Ruggles Il sterry for plaintiff, and Gil
lett 4 FOrde for defendant; dismissed.
II. c. Cross VS.. j. s. Cleveland and Ma.
ry j. Cleveland; GilIett & Forde fol
pIaiutif, and Ruggles j. Sterry for ue
PENDANTS; Judgment for plaintiff against
defendants for 81, 992, and costs.
Iiethural Allen VS.. s. X. Wright; judg'
ment for plaintiff against defendant fol
costs.
E. +. Garrison vs.. w. B. Luther; C. B
Bachelor atty for plaintiff; appeal; dis
missed at defendants cost.
John Gels & Co. VS.. s. J. Crawford Ell
al; Ruggles & Sterry for plaintiff, and
N. C. Mcfarland, Giilett & Forde att yi
tor defendant; judgment for defendant
Barber. against defendants, Crawford
and Steele.
T. II. Cline VS.. Clara p. Ward; iudg-
ment for plaintiff for $460 and costs; Gil
lett & FOrde att'ys for plaintiff.
OrrIn Miller VS.. J. W Gibson and Lou.
lisa j. Gibson; judgment for plaintiff for
e441 and cost s.
@The State OF Kansas vs., Il. w. Collins,
charged with petty larceny; Gillett coun.
ty atty for the State, and C. b. Bachelor
atty for defendant; defendant plead
guilty, and was sentenced to three months
confinement in the county Jail, and ad-
judged TO pay the costs OF the prosecution.
Edwin Davis VS.. Hamilton Howard,
nj
T. N. Sedgwick for plaintiff; Miller ana
Waterbury att'ys for denendants, How
ards, and Sanders and McCarty for de-
PENDANT, Holmes; judgment in favor OF
defendant, Holmes, against defendant,
Catharine Howard, for $3O0.54 and costs,
and judgment in favor Of plaIntifi, Davis,
against defendant, Holmes, for S77.O2 and
costs
Hugh Hughes VS.. Catharine Howard,
Hamilton Howard, and Henry Holmes;
T. N. sedgwick for plaintiff; judgment
fer plaintiff against defendant, Holmes,
for $500 and costs.
MARTHA A. Bible VS.. L. G Anderson;
action Of replevin; judgment for defend.
ant for the possession Of pers onal proper.
ty; Ruggles 4 Sterry att'ys for plaintiff,
and Sanders, Watson & Crawford for
defendant.
John W. 10y, administrator, VS.. Abner
HAdley, administrator, and H. D. shep.
ard and John Ganinger; Z. w. Cunning.
ham for plaintiff; judgment FOR plainLitf
against defendants Sheppard and Gaming.
er for 1912 and costs.
School District, No. 81, Lyon County
Kansas, VS.. j. j. Wright; judgment fol
defendant; +. e. Smith for plaintiff, and
Z. w. Cunningham for defendant.
Jacob L. Co1fman vs.. Barzi La Gray and
Parmelia Gray; Wilson Sh annon and f
s. Waterbury for plaintiff, and Clough
q Wheat, and Judge Ruggles for de-
PENDANTS; judgment for plaintiff.
City OF EmpOria Va. +. w. Volmer.
Defendant charged with keeping q tip
pling house on Sunday. The jury returned
q verdict Of guilty, and the court imposed
q fine Of S25 and the costs OF prosecution
against the defen dant, with an order FOL
his commitment II default be made In
payment Of the same. K. n. Ruggles att'y
for the City, and +. K. Smith and j. V
Sanders Att'ys for defendant
The above is 9 report OF all the case
entered on the journal OF the Distric
Court 1t the present time. Several cases
still remain to be entered on the journa
Of proceedings.