Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-11-24
A VALUABLE MULE.
Under Attachment for Over Twent,
Years-Costs Amount to $4,000.

Under Attachment for Over Twenty
Years-Costs Amount to $4,000.
Everybody about Gait knows K. I. Scott,
a farmer residing seven or eight miles east
oftown a1d, no doubt, they will be amused
by reading the following from the Stock
ton Independent concerning a mule which
has been in Mr. SCOTS safe keeping for a
number of years:
/ Hello, Bob, how's the mule ?''
First rate"
Still alive and eating agains. the writ p
Yes, the mules sll right, and as lively
as when first took charge of him."
We'll, guess | bad better take another
receipt from you, Bob, to keep the Sheriffs
records straight said Under Sheriff Long
| in an official talk with R. 7. Scott, who
| CHANGED TO drop into the Sheriff's Office re-
Gently to report thst lie was alive and that
be still recognizes the red tape which is al
tached 10 an old mule. NJ. Scott signed
the following paper:
| l, R. T. Scott do hereby certify that of the
two mules that were left in my charge by
| Thomas Cunningham, Sheriff of San Joaquln
county, in is p and which mules was in ormed
belonged to the estate of VI. Capurro insolyent,
/ one died in the year 1878. The other is still at
| this date alive and doing well, considering age
ana infirmities incident thereto, she said mule
| being now 10 my certain knowledge about
thirty years old. nevertheless am st,li holding
| the sid mule subject to the orders of Thomas
| Cunningham, Sheriff. X. L. SCoTT
| Dated stockton, November II, 1,90
/ The story of the mule is interesting to
shoT how property can be tied up in iisa-
| ton. Somewhere about 1864 NJ. Capurro
was well-to-do business man of this city,
| owning fine team, which was engaged in
| hauling freight to the mountains, and
| horse and drsy, which the owner used
about the city. Hard luck came upon the
! pioneer, however, and along in 1866, when
| G. @. Emerson was Sheriff, az attachment
was issued against Mr.. Capurro's property,
| and the mule team and horse and 6ray
we're taken in charge By the officer.
The owner claimed 8 pair of mules as
| exempt properly under lsw exe;npting a
| pair Of animals for teamstsr, and also set
up a claim to his horse and dray, which
were the means of his livelihood. Then
commenced a legal fight, and in a little
while the Stockton man was forced into in.
sovency under the United States laws He
| finally won in his fight for The horse and
dray, but the pair of mules claimed as ex-
empt for teamsteT were tied up in itiga-
| ton which has never been settled.
The Sheriff then in office held the ami
mails uuder writ of attachment and when
he went out of Office in 1867 the mules
we're delivered to his successor, Freeman
Mills. Two years later Sheriff Mills gave
| the animals to the next Sheriff George G..
Castle, and in 1872, when Sheriff Cunning
ham went into office the mules were given
over with the books and records and prop
eIty under attachment.
Sheriff Cunningham place the mules in
the charge of r. T. Scott. as the Sheriff 8
keeper, and he kept the animals together
until one did in 1878. The other animal
is fat and healthy, and promises to live to
| the end of the century, bat not TO the close
of the litigation.
Allowing the Sherif's keeper s. per day,
which is the limit fixed by Lew for the pay
of keepers, the surviving mule is charged
with SIG, $50 costs. If the mule is charged
With ranch fees at 81 per month the bill
against the animal struggling to outlive the
| Courts is 1916 Adding $144 for ranch fees.
chargeable against the one that grew tired
Of the laws delay and died, would make
the bill for rancning to be collected out of
the only property remaining, the lone
niue, $720.