Northwest enterprise. [volume] (Anacortes, Wash. Ter.) 1882-1887, 1882-12-23
DISTRICT COURT.
No In iietinents Found by the Nrnnd
Jury-kUt rev Cases Tried.

The District Court of WhatGem coun.
| ty met at Lacomcr, Tuesday, Dec. 18th
( But little business OF any importance wa
tlied at this tenn of court, and AS the
Grand Jury found no indictments, II,
criminal proceed pgs whatever were had
The first case that came before hAe court
for trial was the Ter W.. Chas. Jackson
and Hiram Olney, for violation Of the
scaling law. The court sustained the
law, and on motion Tor II rc-argument, il
was granted, to take place in Seattle,
on the 18th of February. The other
case similar to this will be continued.
In the case OF AL Learner VS.. =. Poison
ioi $92 for timber cut on plaintiffs land,
and which was to he paid Tor 10y the use
OF certain ditch, judgment WAS @xain-
ed in favor OF the plaintiff.
The case of Deu' sch vs.. Munks WAS
again thrown out Of court owing tn
to errors in drawing up papers in the
case. The Cthrr cascs are AS follows.
Fred Aye vs.. J. p. Brewster, settled
Jacol Bros. & Co. vs.. {. f. Buwdcn, t"
be settled; I. Carroll vs. Bowdcn, referred
tn w. 7. Stoll; G. n. Calhoun vs.. W.
Armstrong, settled. Tom. +. Lindsay W
w. Armstrong, settled; G. J. Eddy VS.. j.
O'Laughlin, settled Ms per stipulation
flied, and jud Imcnt rendered in favor of
defendant A. Greggs VS.. Il. Mills, de-
fault, judgment to plaintiff; NJ. Mcguire
VS.. Powell & Herndon. dismissed; Charles
Wilson VS.. &. g. Wells default, referred
to Gil!iland F. Powell vs.. Ellnn Powell,
default, referred to Tinxham; G. Eddy vs..
Cove & Wilson, verdict tor plaintiff for
$S2. w. w. Smith VS.. ID. 7. Lewis, ct al,
demurred; b. Duffy We. A. Green. With
drawn; |. Westland VS.. Oliver Anderson,
judgment for plaintiff; W. Il. Stol! VS.. G.
V. Calhoun, ct al, settled; A. Wells VS.. II.
Kimball. settled j. & g. Caches vs. o.
Nelson. continued till next term; +. w.
Wusthotf va. G. g. Wells, default, judg
meht $237S0.
REPORT OF GRAND JURY.
The report of the Grand Jury does not
contain matter OF sufficient interest to
warrant Its publication entire. The re-
port recites that, having carefully Exams
ined all matters brought before them, the
Grad Jury has been unable 10 sbtain sat-
ticient evidence TO warrant am indictment.
Regarding the condition of county buld-
ings, they find, lst-That some years ago
the Court House at Whatt ON was tenn
porarly repaired by supports being placed
under the building; that the foundation
is weak, and therefore unsafe. and recon,
mend that the attention m the Commits
sioncrs I've called to the same. I'd Rec
onimcnd The purchase OF new safe tor
the use of the Treasurer, ,s the one now
IN use is too small. 3d--That the Audit
or's office is not supplied with pepper
safe tor keeping the records; that the in
dex to the records is worn ont, and new
books should I've pIocured; and that the
Auditor he authorized to procure proper
books IN which to record town plats and
that the Auditor make out complete
index OF al! records in his Office. 4th-
Recommend that the Probate Judge he
supplied with safe. 5th-Find that the
doors 70 the various county Offices are in
an unsafe condition, and that the same
should be attended TO.