, 1889-01-29
AMUSING LEGAL FREAKS.
SINGULAR CASES STRANGELY HAN
DIED IN LAW COURTS.

woman rs personal property. Tho unique
precedent was laid some twenty-five or
thirty years ago. and before women's
rights had progressed Us far as they have
since. a citizen of old Hooking married
a young lady against tho energetic pro-
test of her father. and set up housekeep-
ing on his own account. 1t was q case
Of ''love in a cottage" rs n matter of
fact During the temporary absence Of
the unsuspecting bridegroom the wife's
father and brothers Invaded loves d6mi-
cile and carried her off.
Tho despoiled husband repaired TO a
neighoring justice of the peace in search
of law suited to the cxigcncies Of the
case. After n thorough investigation of
Swans Treaties and Cradlebaugh's Con
stable. il was unanimously decided by
the squire, the constable RHd the desolate
husband that the proper thing to do was
TO proceed by an action in replcvfnl
WOMAN AS PERSONAL PROPERTY.
Tho papers wero accordingly made out
and the writ lodged in the hands of the
constable, who proceeded at once to exc
cute 1t, and rcplevined the woman from
tho custody OF her father. who, though
exceedingly irate, didn't feel like resist
ing the cdict of the court. When 1t cane
to %appraising the property and fixing the
sworn value Of a woman, the constable
was rather perplcxed, but the three free
holders whom he called in to act as APP
praisers solved the problem in n manner
at once off hand and business like.
They sent for her husband, tho plain
tiff, and ascertaincd for him that he had
expended the following sums of money
upon his property License, rs cents;
Justices marriage fee, Sc. 80; one new
cents. They furthermore decided that
the woman VIVA Appri4hnhla nroparfv ~
and her value was only to DO estimated
theoretically. Whcrct'pon they fixed
the value of her labor and services for
the month at 81. which they added to
the other items, making $500.
In due course of timo the trial came
off and the plaintiff duly and satisfacto-
rily proved his ownership by producing
his marriage certificate. Tho defendant
could not upset this evidence, and the
plaintiff got judgment of restitution and
20 cents damages. His property was
then restored to him in due and regular
form, and the defendant was solemnly
notified that n repetition of his offense
would be regarded as petty larceny and
punished accordingly. The man and his
wife are still living happily and CON
tentedly together.
But Hooking county cannot lay claim
to exclusivencss in ''precedents," Over
In her next door neighbor, Perry, q
horse was once restored TO its rightful
neighbor under a writ OF habeas corpus
issued by n justice of the peace.
AS horse broke into BIS pasture,
w~hereupon b put 1t into his stable,
locked the door and refused to rive it
up. A secured the services of the cele-
brated Shep Tinker MS his legel adviser.
Shep knew that his client could not give
the necessary bail in un action by reple-
vim, so he decided to bring n different
sort of an notion.
With this intent he went before n JUS
tico of the peace In old StraltsviIle, and
took out n writ of habeas corpus and
literally brought h horse into our
Lawyer Saunders, n most brilliant prac-
titioner at the Logan bar and long the
prosecuting attorney of Hooking county,
was called on tho other side.
He didn't know the nature of the case
until tho constable made his return upon
the writ.
why" exclaimed Mr.. Saunders, with
n look of blank astonishmcnt, this court
ant issue such n writ and no court could
issue n for n horsel' Shep was more
than equal TO the emergency.
"Your honor" hc said, "a wise and
Just court can do anything that is laid
down In the books. The writ of habeas
corpus has been recognized rs sacred for
centuries. To say that this court can't
issue it is to say that it Is ignorant OF
Magma Charta."
But this court kin Issue it." inter
posed tho justice, land 1t has Issued it
already"
Mr.. Saunders saw his mistake and
~apologized to the court for having doubt
ed its ability to do anything it chose. 1t
Is needless to say that the horse was re-
stored TO its owner.
WHAT HIS BUSINESS WAS.
As funny n thing rs ever occurred In
n court happened ut Napoleon, o., in
1889, before Judge Potter and q Jury. A
case was on trial, and an outsider seated
himself on ono of the puncheons ut the
far end OF the panel of jurors, there be-
ing no other available seat. When the
defendants counse arose to address the
jury he scanned the face Of each very
closely, and naturally his gaze was
directed to the furthest man from him,
who didn't happen to be a juror at all.
Glaring Mt him, he begani
Gentlemen Of the jury want to
know what this man (referringS to the
plaintiff in h easel has come into court
fort What Is his business? What right
has he here? What Is no seeking for?
Again ! repeat, gentlemen of the jury,
why Is he hercg'
Ahc SOullIl ludl lllablncu Una inc
question had direct reference to himself,
and when tho lawyer paused to give duo
weight and emphasis to tho question, he
jumped TO his feet and howled:
what am l here for. you cross eyed
cock OF the walk2 What am / seeking
for In this here COURT I'll tell you in
short order, you weazen faced old son of
a gun. I've been here three days
a-waitin' fer my fees, and nary u red kin
| git. Pay me my witness fees, sir, and
I'll git out of here immegiately."
This unexpected Grafton brought down
tho house, and the lawyer never finished
his able argument
John IL. Morrison practiced law many
years ago ut Findlay and all through
that section of Ohio. He had some
striking peculiaritics, which were In the
habit of cropping out in court He was
once trying u case before Judge Patrick
henry Goodo and n jury, and opened his
side OF the case as follows:
MAY 1t please the court, by the per-
jury of witnesses, the Ignorance OF the
jury and the connivanco OF the court, l
expect to lose this case"
What Is that you say, Mr.. Morrison?"
THAT is all | have tosay on uatp point,