Wichita eagle., 1889-10-13
THE COURTS.
PROBATE COURT

appointed to tho estate of L. D. Dewey
deceased.
Sale of real estate reported by the guar
dian of Harmon L. Boyer. minor.
Letters of administration issued to AL
mira Brown in estate of r. c. Brown, de
ceased. Bond was filed.
DISTRICT COURT.
Joseph Peachey VS. Robert NJ Jacks e
| al; judgment in favor of plaintiff fol
plaintiff for S., O73. 80
Creditor & Buckwaiter VS. c. P. Rector
on trial by court.
w. NJ. Bond VS. Abraham Smith; dis
| missed at costs.
S. d. Pallet VS. Hale Cowley ct al: judg-
ment in favor of plaintiff for 81 1855
Henry A. Jackson VS. w. E. Head; judg-
ment in favor of plaintiff for s3S.
Z. G. Smith Jr. VS. L. w. Ong ct al
| judgment in favor of plaintiff for 81. 100 16
S. E. Anderson VS. Alfred E. Miller; ap-
peal dismissed by consent.
| Citizens bank of Wichita vs. John H
Medbury ct al; continued and goes to heel
of docket.
r. R. Slyter vs. Mcintyre Bros; contin-
ued for term.
| c. L. Darcy VS. Memphis & Denver Town
company; continued and goes to heel OF
docket.
| George H. Blackwelder ct al: VS. John
| Gascoign; judgment for plaintiff in sum of
SS2777.
r. Weeks G. Son VS.. A. G.. Briggs con-
tinued for service.
w. W. Lynch VS.. T. D. Corkhill: contia-
ned and o,neS To baal of Iockat
John G. Mossman VS.. Rachael A. Rob-
ertson ct al; continued for service
t. Z. Kessinger VS.. Carry ELL; continued
for term.
John c. Mossman vs. George I. Rankin
ct al; judgment in favor of plaintiff for
$6oS. 40
S. Miller VS.. Rosa Werner ct al; appeal
dismissed
John c. Mossman VS.. Wyley Brown ct
al; Judgment for plaintiff for S6OS. 40.
w. II. JeZzord vs. L. j. Harris ct al. ::
case set for the 18th.
John G. Mossman VS.. Stephen W. Cal
vim ct al; Improperly on docket.
George A. Ulmer ct al. VS.. H. K. War
rem; case settled.
David Thomas VS.. NJ. J. Rochelle ct ali;
judgment in favor of plaintiff for s., 674 20,
c. A. Norton VS. A. and NJ. Garrett; mo-
ton for new trial
Geo E. Campbell VS. E. Il. Rrown ct al t.;
motion made TO confirm sale.
Jacob BissantZ VS. Anna NJ. johnson;
motion filed for new trial
Daniel Sherwood VS. Mary Holloway ct
al; motion to yacate judgment.
4. X. Slater VS. Mcintyre Bros; motion
made for a continuance.
Lewis Steinbuchel VS. Michael Walsh;
motion for judgment by default
w. S. Roberts VS. VIM, H. Dyer; motion
to vacate order dismissing appeals.
ZIAIMERLY-JEROME CASE.
On reconvening of the district court in
the afternoon Judge Reed rendered the
following decision in the Zimmerly-
Jerome case: This is matter that
ought not to be delayed any further. Of
course l understand how some members of
the bar, and some of the public, may think
this matter has been trifled with; that the
court has not handled it with that strong
grip with which he should have handled
it. But to those who understand the
whole scope Of the matter it will be very
apparent that l pursued the only course
Importance. Where a grave charge like
this was made | could not take any hasty
action
The delay has not been due to the
court. [ have fixed day from time to
time ana the parties were not prepared |
So much for that. Now, l think the mat
ter ought to be wound up. 1 see no reason
on the part of Judge Bal |
derson to set aside the decree and appoint |
a guardian ad Item in place of Mr.. Moore. |
The application is unsupported by facts, |
and it would be unwarranted on my part. |
1t would be arbitrary to take any sCc:.::
action on such application. l could not |
establish a precedent in this court of that
character, where the decree was regularly |
and where no facts were brought
TO the attention of the court which i'm
peached the decree. For that reason. | |
overrule the application to set aside the
decree. But in view of the step am about
to take, | desire to state in this connection
hat nothing has transpred in this case to
affect my belief in the professional honor
and integrity of Mr.. Moore. Nothing has
transpired in this case which has affected
my belief in the highest honor and integ-
rity of Mr.. Smythe. Yet, while that is
rue, this thing has taken a shape which
requires me TO take a certain action. But
hat action is not based on the theory that
here is anything wrong. Under the cir
l can aud my highest opinion
If the honor and integrity of Mr.. Moore
and Mr.. Smythe.
Notwithstanding I override the appli-
,ation to set aside the decree, and over
'ule the application to appoint guardian
I'd Item in place of Mr.. Moore. l feel it
iue to me as a judge, to meet any false
nay 90 about like roaring lion seeking
whom it may devour-it is due to myself,
o the minor heirs, and to the guardian
I'd litem that the court make an lnvestiga-
ion of its own motion. This inyestIga-
ion is not made on the strength of the
application, because the application is IN
and for that reason / could not
pursue an Investigation on the applica-
ion. But, as a court of equity, | will ap-
Joint special commissioner to iuvesti-
.ate this whole transaction. who, under
he law. will have full power to examine
witnesses and who, under the law, will be
and is authorized to report to
his court the condition of matters, for the
purpose of determining whether this de-
rec is proper or improper, and, if i'm
roper, it will be set aside, and, If proper,
will be sustained"
In determining who that commissioner
all be / must take into consideration the |
history of the case Messrs. Dale & Wall
ave been connected with il. | have no
ault to find with them. But they seem
o intimate that it would be unpleasant
or them TO remain in the matter further |
nd for this reason | will appoint Harry |
81 Gordon as special commissioner to in
estigate this matter, with full power to
xamIne witnesses; and | urge upon every
ody who may hear me at this time, aud l
rye upon those who can not hear me, the
ecessity, if there is anything wrong, of
eporting TO this special commissioner aud
him OF the facts, so that he may
etermine this matter and 1t may be set