Daily Republican., 1879-12-06
OUR COUNTY COURT.
The Harris Ejectment Case ON the
Drag-Counsel stiiI Arguing the
Case.

| "SS~uhScA 0tilA ATkuADK I'M
Case.
Specially Reported for the REPUBLICAN.
New CASTLE, Dec. S.
Mr.. Cummins in continuing his argu.
ment said that they were not trying
the case on supposition; the arguments
Of learned Counsel are not proof in the
case but mentioned merely to draw the
minds OF the jury to some important
facts which are proofs in the case and
it is for the jury to decide whether the
the facts have been proven.
At LAO p. m. Mr.. Cummins conclud.
ed his argument and the Court took @
recess until three o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Court re-assembled at o'clock.
Mr.. Spruance for the plaintiff in the
Harris ejectment case than began his
argument, on addressing the Jury he
said we may all congratulate ourselves
that we can see the end of this case. I,
has been long and tedious trial and
We are exceedingly gratiied to you fol
your attention as it is very unpleas-
ant thing to summon men from their
business and place them in small
box. Mr.. Spruance said that it was
his duty to perform the last act in this
drama so far as it concerns party or
parties and when he was done he said
it would be for The Jury to consider
what is right in all that you have
heard. The speaker said that he did
not want anything but the right and if
they were entitled to the land he urged
the Jury then to so render the verdict.
Mr.. Spruance said that the counsel for
defense had said "that you must estab-
lish a verdict beyond doubt" He
contended that there was no such
principle in this case. This is not a
criminal case, but civil case, and
you give that verdict to the party
which has as a whole the preponder-
ance of truth, you balance the testi-
mony on either side against the scale
and the side that tips the beam you
give your verdict in their favor. If
after listening to the case for eight days
you are satisfied that the defendan. is
not entitled to the land rightfully then
you should render a verdict for the
plaintiff. Mr.. Spruanoe said that the
plaintiff claimed the land; that they
had laid before the Jury a legal title
which is older and better than the de-
PENDANTS. Mr.. Spruance said that it
is presumption Of law that the parties
having the oldest legal title is entitled
to the land, unless it is proven that the
defendant has had the property a suf-
fcient length of time to deprive the
plaintiff of the right.
Mr.. Spruance in his remarks alluded
to an article published in the "Gazette"
few days ago, in which it is stated
that he could not furnish him (the wit :.
ness Mr.. Moore with brains"
That statement coming from whatever
source it may is utterly false. Some
people imagine that dog fights are on
the same level with the proceedings of
the court. Mr.. Spruance said he came
to try the case as a gentleman and did
not propose to ridicule any of the wit
nesses.
Mr.. Spruance commented at some
length on the Discrepancies in the
Messrs. Moore's statement and in
speaking of Mr.. Moore's evidence he
said, without impeaching his veracity
at all, he must question his entire ac-
curacy, as it was impossible for one to
fix dates at as early an age as he then
was. At 6.l0 Mr.. Spruance had not
concluded his argument and the Court
adjourned until 8 o'clock tomorrow
morning.