Jamestown weekly alert. [volume] (Jamestown, Stutsman County, D.T. [N.D.]) 1882-1925, 1889-04-18
COURT PROCEEDINGS.
Matters in the District Court-The
Yankton $1,000 Order Case
Postponed.
Prof. Blake, the Kansas Weather
Prophet, Writes About the
April Weather.
Immigrants Bound for the Pacific
Coast May Have q Hard
Time to get Back.
District Court Notes

District Court Notes
The afternoon session of Monday was
occupied in finishing the case of Bowman
VS.. Eppinger. Mr.. Glaspell's motion on
behalf of the defence to instruct the
jury to return verdict for the defend
ant, on the ground that no evidence had
been introduced by the plaintiff to show
that Newhauser had any authority from
Eppinger to contract loan for the firm
was denied by the court, and Mr.. Eppir-
ger took the stand for the defense.
He testified that Newhauser was en-
ployed by him as a clerk and bookkeeper,
with authority to draw checks for the
necessary expenses Of the store, such as
coal, lights, ETC., and also for the
salaries of himself and fellow clerks, but
which extended no further. Newhauser
had no authority to purchase goods, he
always did that himself. He had no reg
ular time for making his visits of inspec-
ton; on an average he came once
month. At these visits he examined the
stock, to see what was wanting, and look
ed over the books. He had never seen
any checks given by Newhauser to out
side parties, until this one of Bowmans'.
The endorsement of his name on the
back of that check was not his hand
writing. He had no written contract
with Newhanser. He was in Bismarck
at the time.tbis transaction took place.
In his speech to the jury for the plain
tiff Mr.. Nickeus claimed that in this case
it was clearly proved by the evidence
that the plaintiff had taken all reason
able amount of care to ascertain the
authority of Newhauser before making
him this loan. He had been told by
Newhauser that he had this authority
and he had verified that statement by en-
quiring among these other persons with
whom Newhauser had had similar trans
actions, and who had been repaid all
right, and finding Newhausers state
ments corroborated in this way he made
the loan. If Eppinger had used due and
proper diligence in the oversight of his
agent he must have known that these
transactions were being carried on, and
Bowman was justified in assuming that
Eppinger did know of it and was salts
fed that it should be done. That beng
80 it was not right that Eppinger should
now come into court and claim to be ex-
empted from the consequences in which
an innocent third person had been in
volved, through his negligence in looking
after his agent.
Mr. Glaspell addressing the jury for
the defense, pointed out that there had
not been a scrap of evidence introduced
by the plaintiff in regard to the alleged
authority of Newhauser to contract
loans for Eppinger, except the statement
of Newhauser, made to Bowman. 1t
was we'll established rule of law that a
third person in dealing with an agent
was bound to protect himself by finding
out from the principal as to the extent
of the agents authority. A mere state
ment or assumption of authority on the
part of the agent, was not sufficient, and
if any person trusted to that statement
he must do at his own risk. MI. .Epplnger
has testified that he was in Bismarck at
the time, but the plaintiff, although
warned by Eppinger's bankers against
making the loan, did so on the statement
of Newhauser that he had done so before.
If it had been proved that he had done
so before and that Eppinger knew OF 1t,
Eppinger would be liable, but there was
not particle of evidence before the jury
to show that Eppinger knew OF any such
transaction, or even that any such trans.
action had taken place.
After some brief instructions by the
court on the questions of law involved IN
the case, the jury retired with instruction
to render a sealed verdict. and court adj
iourned until ten o'clock on Tuesday
morning.
On Tuesday morning the jury returned
verdict for Bowman for S21SS9, beng
the amount claimed with interest. The
court granted a stay OF execution for
sixty days for the defendant to move for
new trial.
The case of John B. Austin VS. the
Northern Pacific railroad, was continued
over the term.
On Wednesday morning the case or
James A. Kennedy VS. the Northern Pa-
cific railroad, will be tried before jury.
This is the case where an engine ran into
the plaintiffs hay wagon at the James
town depot.
The hearing of the application for a
mandamus to compel the auditor OF the
territory to issue warrant for s. 900 to
the bank of Canton. to whom it has been
assigned by Trustee Gale. of the lank-
ton asylum, has been postponed until
Saturday morning. Attorney General
Nicke,ls Will represent the territory and
Judge Garland will appear for the Can
ton bank The whole question Of the
validity of the appointment of the board
by Gov. Church is expected to come up.
The greater part of the session on