Weekly Arizona citizen., 1880-12-04

The examlnatian of D. A. Sanford
 charged with stealing cattle, was con-
 cluded on Thursday before Justice
 Meyer by the cOmmittal of the accused
 for the action of the grand jury This is
 a case of more than usual importance,
 both to this community and the Terri
 tory at large. Newly settled countries
 are peculiarly liable to the inroads of
 stock thieves and the frauds of stock
 raisers, and nothing but an absolute
 and rigid enforcement of the penal
 laws.insures security to honest dealers,
 and the Territory against sporadic
 outbursts of violence, which, under
 the name of justice, too often assume
 the phase of wild license. To protect
 themselves, the stock -raIsers in Pima
 county last spring organized an assO-
 citation, with H. c. Hooker as Presi-
 den., and l. N. Harvey, of the firm of
 Vail & Harvey, Secretary. The or
 ganization numbers among its mem
 bers the leading stock-raiseTs of the county. Many of these gentlemen have suffered severely from the depre-
 dations upon their cattle ranges, but they also concluded that to suppress lawlesSness of this character in the Territory it was necessary to show spirit and energy at home,
 where cattle-stealing was of less frequent occurrence and more readily detected They secured the services of an efficient detective,
 whose business it was to visit the meat markets in Tucson, Tombstone and the outlying towns and villages and obtain information from the butchers. Several cases were brought to the notice of the Grand Jury, but that body did not deem the evidence sufficient to justify an indictment. A few weeks ago D. A. Sanford, prom
 inent stock.raiser, sold to butcher in this city ten head of cattle. The cattle were selected by the orders of San
 fOId, corralled over night and thor oughly examined snd vented by the accused and his men in the morning.
 Sanford moreover manifested an un- usual officiousness by assisting to drive the cattle several miles on the road to Tucson, the reason for which
 was not 50 apparent at the time as it subsequently, became. One of the cattle, a COW three years old, peculiar ly marked by nature and we'll known to Sanford and his vaqueros, made her escape and returned to the ranch. Sanford manifested much i'm patience until she was secured and on her way to market. She was soon butchered and the hide sold to L. ZeckendOrf & Co.,, but a neighbor of Vail < Harvey saw her on her way to Tucson, and recognizing the brand of the above firm, and also the marks, which were well known in the vicin- ity, informed her owners. The detect i've of the Association was put on the trail, and the hide found and identi- fled by the butcher who purchased the cattle from Sanford. The brand of Vail & Harvey was found on the skin with the brand of Sanford over it, identifying the animal as one which had been branded by the former firm when a calf, and over which there had been a controversy at the time, and the calf finally recognized by the lat ter 10 belong to Vail & Harvey. A warrant was sworn out by Mir Harvey, the Secretary of the ' Arizona Stock Raisers' Association, and an exam ination was begun before Justice Meyer on last Tuesday. The above facts were given in evidence, and it was further proved that when the controversy occurred several years ago about the calf, wisdom somewhat akin to that of Solomon was employed in deciding it. The mother of the calf was brought down and the cali, with unmistakeable in siinct, rushed over to her and exhibit ed all the signs of filial affection. Since then, both because of the like ness 10 the mother with whom it has always run and on account of the con- troversy, it has been we'll known to all parties on the ranch. The butcher testified that the ear marks had been with 10 such an extent | as tc render them unrecOgnizable. 1 The accused endeavored unsuccess- fully to trace his brand on the hide | and show that he had twice branded | the animal. For conclusive evidence ! the hide was dlvested of the hair and 1 the marks disclosed as put there by | the two parties. Experts clinched the testimony, and the Justice had but one co arse to pursue, as stated above. Sanford was ably defended by Judge | Haynes, and the case for the Territory very clearly and ingeniously unfolded by Col. Zabriskie, who, in an elabor- ate cross-examination, demolished he defcnces of the accused and in an and exhaustive argument dis closed the points which the common wealth will rely on for conviction. Whatever may be the end of the case his preliminary examination will be of great value 10 the community. It