The Lake County star. [volume] (Chase, Mich.) 1873-current, 1875-07-15
CONTEMPT Of The Injunction.

On TUESDAY laSt, the auJouThcu
session of Circuit Court for Lake
county was held at Chase. After
hearing and disposing Of motions,
&C., in several cases of minor i'm
portance, the case for contempt of
the injunction restraining the re-
moval of the county property was
called.
The party first arraigned was M.
L. Quackcnbush; the Judge, after
hearing the testimony, holding his
decision. Geo. s. Pool was exam
ined and acquitted. Oliver Daven-
port and George Broefflc were next
arraigned, portion of the tcsti-
mony heard, and their cases rested
till the following morning.
At nine o'clock a. m, July 18th,
Court again convened, and the re-
mainder of evidence in Broeffie's
case brought in. The remainder of
the parties charged were then ar
raigned jointly; their names being
as follows: H. A. Bray, Dudley
Miner, Jno. Miner, C:M. c. Ross,
Edgar Campbell, Chas. II. Chick,
M. D. O'Brien, Patrick O'Brien, c.
f. Basom, Oliver Davenport, VIM.
Wood, J. B. Taylor. The counsel
for the prosecution, were S. F.
Dwight, of Hersey, and F. Dumon,
of Big Rapids; and for the respond
ents-Judge White, of .Ludington,
and Judge Burch, of Hersey.
There was such similarity Of
testimony for and against each par
ty summoned, that q detailed re-
port would be monotonous and un-
necessary. The weight of testimo-
ny in favor of the respondents went
to show that there was no intention
to violate an injunction; most of
the respondents testifying that they
did not hear the injunction read on
the morning of April Both; and
that they were not fully aware an
injunction had been issued. The
mass of evidence regarding Mr..
Towner's conversation Mt Baldwin,
on the evening of April 10Th, went
to show that he gave encourage
ment to remove the property on the
following morning.
One point claimed by the coun-
sci for respondents was that the
County Treasurer whose Office was
removed previous to the issuing of
the injunction, was the proper Gus
todian Of the safe.
The evidence on the part of the
prosecution was offered to show
that an injunction had been issued,
filed and served in due form, and
that it was read to the crowd on
the morning of the Both. Also,
that several of the respondents
heard the injunction read, and then
violated it.
AS regards the disturbance, the
entire evidence went to show that
it was mixed affair, with blame
resting upon both parties.
The examination of witnesses
continued, with intcrmissions for
dinner and supper, until about 8
o'clock p. m, when the evidence
was declared all in. Judge Wheel
er then discharged II. A. Bray,
John Miner, Patrick O'Brien and
j. b. Taylor, saying that he wished
to further consider the evidence
bearing upon the other cases.
Court then adjourned until 8 o'clock
on the morning of the 18th.
Judge Burch opened the argu-
mcnt in behalf of the respondents,
saying that he presumed extended
discussion unnecessary. The
weight of evidence showed that the
parties were ignorant Of any in
junction, and therefore not strictly
liable. He claimed that ID. G. War
ner, A. Towner and j. M. Foster,
as REALTORS to Attorney General
Smith, were substantially the par
ties in the Affirmative in this action.
He then cited the conversation of
Towner with certain parties at Bald
win, on the evening of April 10Th,
in regard to his not objecting to y
removal of the records, if they
would come down after them; as be-
ing the waving Of further proceed
ing in the matter. He also, men,
toned telegram sent by Towner
to his counsel, while the latter was
at Ludington, substantially asking
a discontinuance Of action, as show
ing, at one time, disposition in
the mind Of Towner to stay pro-
ccedings. What was Towner's in
tention? To lead the respondents
to violate the Injunction, in order