Centre Democrat. [volume] (Bellefonte, Pa.) 1848-1989, 1881-02-03
ADDITIONAL LOCALS.

THE SECOND WEEK oF CoURT.-Court
opened Monday morning at 10 O'Clock,
His Honor Judge Orvis prc.iding. On ac-
count OF no business being before the
Court, /, adjourned 10 > o'clock 7. ". In
the afternoon the trial list was called over,
aud cases marked rcady for trial at this
term and 10 hear applications for con,inu-
ance OF causes. The list of Traverse jur-
ors was also called, most of them being
present A jury was summoned to the box
and one cause after another called, until all
the causes for trial had been gone over,
but none Of the parties to suits being pre-
pared for trial, Court adjourned until
Tuesday morning.
Court met in pursuance Of adjournment,
His Honor Judge &. a. Mayer presiding,
with Associate Judges Diven and Franck
on the bench. The first cause taken up
was the one of a. G. Geary vs. Samuel
kryder--an ejeCtmcnt for part OF the
William Hahn tract, situated in Walker
township. The point for the Jury TO de-
eide in this case was whether h. r. Shat
fer, who purchased this land at Treasurer =
sale in 1872, for a. G. Gcary, when it was
sold for taxes was or was not the agent Of
Samuel Krydcr 30 give his personal atien-
tion In it and to pay the taxes on the land,
Mr.. kryder being a resident of another
county. 1t appeared from the evidence
that in 1871 Mr.. kryder had sked Mr..
Shaffer 10 have his land put on and assessed
in the unscate1 list Of Walker township
-. = IL L 4 1
he was to do, and that be did not agree to
pny hc tdres nor see that they were paid.
Mr.. kryder testified that he understood
that Mr.. Shaaer was 20 look after and at
tend to the land, and for that reason he
never gave any attention to the PAY ment OF
the taxes on it. The jury returned a YER
dict for the defendant, which was 20 the
effect that Mr.. Shaffer was the agent Of
Mr.. Kryder at the time Of the sale, and
therefore any acts of Mr.. Shaffer, at that
time, would enure to the benefit of his rrin-
cipal, Mr.. Kryder.
The next cause tried WAS Campbell
Bros. VS. James McMullen, constable. for
having levied on the property OF the firm Of
Campbell Brothers, and sold 1t for the in
dividual Indebtedness of George w. Camp
bell, a member of the firm. The jury, up
to Wednesday at II O'Clock, had not vet
agreed.
The next cause called and now being
tried Is the one of Frank j. Weaver VS..
Benjamin Hafiley for closing up road
between the two properties owned by these
parties, which WAS to have been left open
by an agreement between the parties at the
time the properties were purchased.
Court viii in all probability adjourn
to-day as there are but two more cases on
the list for trial.
REPORT OF GRAND JURY.
The Grand Inquest having followed the
instructions of the Court and disposed ri
all the business laid before Us, respectfully
report that we have carefully examined
the county buildings and find them in
good repair and we'll taken care of for the
purposes for which they are used, except
that the roof in front Of the kitchen door
leading into the isil yard mus; facilitate the
escape Of prisoners, being not more than
eight or ten feet from top of wall, and
that the floor in the commissioners room
needs some repairs.
J. w. COLLINS, Foreman.