The Lake Charles echo., 1877-09-20
J. W. BRYAN,
Pres. Par. School Board.


DISTRICT CoURT. The following is a
report of all the cases disposed of at
the regular SeIAember term of tie Dis
trict Court at Lake Charles !:
CIVIL DOCKET.
J. M. Wells. Jr., VS.. G. Barbe, tax
Collector. Wells, for plaintiff Perro-
din, for defendant. Plaintiffs counsel,
for reasons assigned, withdrew from
the case, which was then fixed for trial,
on motion of defendants counsel. and
on the day so fixed, plaintiff failing to
aapear when called, it was dismissed,
as in case of nonsuit, op motion of de-
fendantis counsel.
Mary Green vs. Alfred Moss, admin
istrator. LeHeque for plaintiff Perro-
din and Read for defendant. Judgment
for plaintiff.
Alfred Moss VS.. James Mum & Co.
Perrodin and Read, for plaintiff Le-
vogue and Gallsugher, for defendant.
Judgment for defendants.
Clara Barbe VS.. John Dobbertin.
Appeal from Parish Court. Wells, for
plaintiff Read, for defendant ana ap
peIlant. Judgment, for plaintiff, af-
frmed, with ten per cent damages.
Lucinda Ray VS.. A. T.. Reid, sheriff.
Read, for plaintiff; Gallaugher, for de-
fendaut. Dismissed on exception by
defendant
. Carlos LelAau VS. Blanca Evans, his
wife. Appeal from Parish Court Gal
laugher, for plaintiff Leveque, for de-
fendant and appellant Appeal dis
missed on motion by plaintiff.
John A. Parker VS.. Mary A. Reeves,
admanistratrix. Appeal from Parish
Court. Wells, for plaintiff and appel
l,tnt; Gallaugher, for defendant. Judg-
ment, for defendant, affirmed.
Joseph Mathis VS.. J. G. Gebleu ct
ais. Appeal from Parish Court. Gal
laugher, for plaintiff; Leveqne and
Perrodin, for defendants and APPELLANTS.
Judgment, for plaintiff, affirmed.
CRIMINAL DOCKET.
Slate VS.. Green Spears. Trespass.
Wells, for defendant. Nolle prosequi.
State VS.. H. III. Wheaden. Larceny
and receiving stolen goods. Wells, Tor
defendant. Acquitted.
State VS.. H I'll. Wheeden. Same Of
fence. Wells, for defendant Nolle
prosequi.
State VS.. Joseph Mathis. Same cf-
fence. Gallaugher, for defendant.
Nolle prosequi.
State VS. Joseph Mathis. Same Of
fence. Gallaugher, for defendant.
Nolle prosequi.
Note. The defendants H. H. Whee-
den and Joseph Mathis, in the above
named four cases, We're prosecuted IN
each of those cases for skinning and
trading in the hides Of cattle, dying on
the prairies from natural causes.
These are the first instances OF an
attempt in this parish to prevent this
custom by q G iminal prosecution. One
of the two cases against Mr.. Wheeden
was selected by the District Attorney
for trial by jury as a test case; and re-
sulting in his acquittal, the District At
torney dismissed the other case against
him, and the two cases against Mr..
Mathis, by nolle prosequi.
State VS.. John B. Smith. Larceny.
Wells, for defendant. Acquitted.
Same VS.. same. Same offence. Wells,
for defendant. Noile prosequi.
State VS.. Linton Lyons (col.)
Wounding with dangerous weapon
with intent to murder. Wells, for de-
fendant. Acquitted.
State VS.. Thomas Scally. Assault and
battery. Gallaugher and Read, ap-
pointed by the Court, for defendant.
Acquitted.
Same VS.. same. Same attorneys, ap-
pointed by the Courts for defendant.
Convicted, and recommended to mer-
cy. Sentence, three months in parish
jail, and fine Of fifty dollars and costs y
y ~ default Of Payment, three months
longer in Jail.
State vs.. John King, Assault with