Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1890-11-28
JOSEPH HARE. Contestant.
District Court.
Wednesdays Daily

When the district court met this morn
ing no lawyers were present and Judge
Winchester adjourned till 2 O'Clock.
AT 2 O'Clock the first business was the
admission to practice Of Josiah B. Newton,
Fred L.. Bergen and Edgar Foster.
W. Jamison said he desired to make a
few remarks in the matter of the case of
Hubbard, Spencer, Bartlett d Co. VS.. the
Capital National bank of Bismarck. He
said that the defendant desired a jury, and
if any question was going to be raised by
the plaintiff as to whether there should be
a jury or not, he desired to be heard. Be-
sides, Mr.. Dodge of Fargo would be en-
gagged with him for the defendant, and he
would like to have a day set when the case
would be tried. Judge Francis and w.
Newton, who appear for the plaintiff in
the case, said that it was a court case and
not a case for a jury.
The judge said that When the calendar
was called he wOnld 90 more fully into the
papers and decide whether it should be
tried by the court or before a jury.
A KIDDER CASE.
There was quite a delegation Of Kidder
county attorneys and other citizens to take
part in the election contest case in which
Messrs. Berry and Roberts both desire to
be declared elected to the office of county
treasurer. Mr.. Roberts has the certificate
of the canvassing board, and Mr.. Berry
wants it. According to the returns of the
board, Mr.. Roberts received 179 votes and
Mr.. Berry It's.
Messrs. Francis & Barnes and Louis
Hanitch appear for Mr.. Roberts. and
MesSrs. Newton and Walker for MIR.
Berry.
Writs and returns were read adj libitum,
and Berry's attorneys asked for and were
given further time to examine the returns.
They were given till 5 O'Clock.
At 5 O'Clock Mr.. Newton came in with a
motion to quash the returns of the canvas
sing board of the county of kidder. 1t ap-
pears that the c%anvassing board counted
the ballots and Mr.. Roberts was thereby
counted in. MIR. Newtoa claimed that a
canvass of the ballots was altogether
wrong, Il that the returns of the Judge
and clerks should have been taken. On
the face of the returns Mr.. Berry had four
majority, but when the ballots were count
ed he was four behind Roberts.
The argument had not been completed
when the court adjourned at + O'Clock.
During the afternoon the calendar was
gone through. and jury cases to be tried
next week, were set for trial in the follow
ing order: Nos. 81. 6, IL, 80, l., Al, A and SO
The court cases were set for trial in the
49.
The court adjourned till 10 o'clock this
morning.
[From THURSDAYS Da:ly.]
The second day of the district court
opened yesterday morning at 10 O'CLOCK
The Kidder county contest was the order
When court adjourned the previous even
ing, Mr.. Newton was discussing the ques
ton FOR his client, and il was understood
he had not completed his argument. Al
10 o'clock yesterday morning MI. Newton
was not on hand, and Judge Winchester
told Messrs. Francis and Hanitch to pro
coed. Judge Francis then began his argu'
ment Mr.. Newton came into court about
ten minutes after 10 o'clock and asked il
he was not to be heard. Judge Winches
judge went on with his argument.
When Judge Francis had finished, Mr.
Newton took the floor, and a%pologizing fol
| his hardness, said that he had never had {
client who had to pay One cent because o.
his not being on hand to look after hi
clients interests. Mr.. Newton was fol
lowed by MI. Hanitch who read various
authorities. He said that Kansas, Massa
chusetts and Iowa were against the posi-
ton which he and Judge Francis took, bu'
Minnesota, Texas, New York and Califor
MIA, Michigan and Illinois were in lin,
with the position they took.
The relatOr or complainant in this cas-
sought to quelch the returns as made b!
the county authorities, and have the cour
order the board to canvass the returns
Mr.. Walker followed MIR. Hanitch ant
wound up the case for Mr.. Berry, claiming
that the board Of canvassers had not can
vassed the returns at all, and should b.
compelled to do the work.
Judge Winchester denied the motion
He said that he did not consider that tn
question as to whether there were an,
fraud, was before him. He denied the mo
ton on the ground that it appeared iron
the returns made to the court that the can
wasting board had canyassed the election
returns which were made to the count.
auditor by the Judges and clerks Of cleo