Mower County transcript. [volume] (Lansing, Minn.) 1868-1915, 1884-03-26
DISTRICT COURT.

endar this term, and those requiring a
jury were all disposed of last week, and
on Monday the work of the criminal
calendar was begun.
The duties of the Grand Jury were few,
and under the healthy stimulus of Judge
Farmers ''charge," the work was quickly
dispatched, and the jury dismissed Thurs
day. Only two new indictments were
found, and these will be tried the present
term. The long standing series of State
cases against Lou O. Hofto, were stricken
from the calendar on motion of the Coun-
ty Attorney.
The following report was made by the
Grand Jury:
To the Hon. J. Q. Farmer. Judge 10th
Judicial District
We, the Grand Jury Of Mower county,
after careful examination of the county
Jail and surroundings, respectfully submit
the following report:
We find the jail proper IN fair condi-
ton, clean, and orderly kept. We do find
however, that the safety of individuals
who may be incarcerated therein much
endangered by the circumstances of the
jails surroundings, not only from the dan
ger of collapse of the old court house,
but also from fire in the old court house
orr adjoining building-the ingress and
egress of the Jail being SO situated that
access to occupants would be impossible
in case of conflagration. We therefore
recommend to the County Commissioners
of Mower county the speedy removal Of
the old courthouse.
ID. ALLEN, Foreman.
The first trial on the civil calendar was
the old case of Geo. H. Litchfield vs..
Frank Wachuta and R. J. Mcdonald.
E. B. Crane was the plaintiffs attorney,
and w. H. Merrick for the defendant.
Only the complaining witness was ex-
amined, and the jury was instructed to
return for the plaintiff. Verdict $3.50
and costs.
k'COnslderable interest was shown in the
case of Herman GUM vs.. Daniel Heffner.
The action was brought by Mr.. CUM for
wrongful Seizure of property. Lafayette
French was attorney for the plaintiff and
Richardson, Day & Pierce appeared for
Heffner. The case involved a number of
complicated questions of law, and had
been thoroughly studied, and was ably
tried by counsel ON both sides. The main
argument was on Mr.. Pierce's motion for
a judgment by the Court for costs, in
favor of the defendant. The contest of
counsel was vigorous one, but the mo-
ton was granted.1
The next case tried, was that of Am
hurst A. Sumner vs.. Fl. B. Corey, for sci :
zure of property on an execution. j. N.
Greenman for plaintiff. and Mr.. French
for the defense. The case was regarde d
as an important one, and was watched
with interest. Verdict for plaintiff, and
an order granted for the return of the
property.
In the case of Edwin H. Belts against
VIC. Dillingham;, ct. al, the court made
short work. Mr.. French was the plain
tiffs counsel, and Brown & Forbes, of St.
Ansgar, were attorneys for defendants,
being represented by the junior member
of the firm, Mr.. Forbes. Action had bee
brought for payment of note, and on
motion of Mr.. French, the jury was
instructed to return verdict for the plain
tiff.
In J. G. Hergott vs.. Job Engle, suit was
brought for recovery of wages, with Mr..
Merr1ck for plaintiff, and Mr.. Pierce
for defendant. The jury found for de.
PENDANT.
In the case of D. B. Smith against
Mary Taylor, payment was demanded of
promissory note, and Mr.. Pierce, in be-
half of the plaintiff, introduced demur-
rer to the answer. This was contested
by the defendants counsel, Mr.. French,
and the result favoring the defendant, the
plaintiff lost his cause
A large number of cases Of law are to
be argued before the court, sufficient
doubtless to occupy the entire week. A
special term Of court will be held in few
weeks, At which Judge Start of Roches-
ter will preside, to try number of cases
which Judge Farmer, being an interested
party, can not hear.
In the criminal calendar, the case of the
State vs.. Shelly for larceny of watch,
was tried Monday, with County Attorney
Greenman for the prosecution, and Mr..
French for the defense. The case &C.
cupied nearly the whole day, as numer-
Gus witnesses were examined. The Jury
late in the evening returned verdict of
acquittal.
To-day, Tuesday) the case of the State
VS.. James Opeim, for forgery, is pending.
Later-The jury returned verdict of
met guilty"
R0n K2fhli~o1 prSxn