The Black Hills union. [volume] (Rapid City, Pennington County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1889-1904, 1892-03-11

Circuit Court

FEAtFH NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
In case No. 8, the Aetna Powder Co. VS..
Thomas Sweeney, the court directed a verdict
or plaintiff in the sum Of 4I,652. During
the progress Of Nj. Sweeney's examination,
Nj. Parsons ~propounded 4 question, without
intention Of hurting the feelings Of Mr..
Sweeney, which slightly nettled him however,
causing him to leave the box and make fol
the legal light, Just when within a few feet
the Sheriff, at Judge Fuller's command, inter
fered and prevented a bloody encounter, thus
adding much to Mr.. Parsons comfort and
peace Of mind. The Judge magnanimously
intimated to Mr.. Sweeney that an apology
was necessary, when our chivalrous states at.
torney attempted to do the amende honorable
for Tom, but was abruptly called to time by
the Judge, who resented Mr.. Browns conduct
in unmeasured terms, reminding the gentle.
man that he was not in a police justice cour,
and that the apology must come from Mr.
Sweeney himself. Mr.. Sweeney complied and
the business proceeded as ifnothing had hap.
pened,
The Second case Of the Aetna Powder Co.
VS.. Tom. Sweeney came up this morning.
This action was on a promisory note. The
court ordered that a special venire for twelve
jurors be issued returnable Saturday morning
at 9 o'clock to act as jurors in the case. S. ].
Parsons for plaintiffs and Charles w. Brown
for defendant.
In Elmer Kimble VS.. Samuel F. Lloyd, a
jury trial was waived by counsel, the case
tried to the court and judgement rendered for
plaintiff forthe amount sued. Wood & Buell.
and Edmund Smith, counsel.
In the case Of Pitkins & Brooks VS.. Tom
Sweeney, by agreement Of counsel in open
court, judgement was entered for plaintiff for
the amount Of note sued upon and the case
dismissed. Wood & Buell. and William
Gardner, counsel.
The case of Robert Flormann VS.. c. D.
Crouch, was settled and dismissed. Schrader
& Lewis and A.E. Wallace for plaintiff and
81. Parsons for defendant.
The Rapid Valley Irrigating company VS..
John F. McElroy was settled by stipulation
Of the parties, A. E. Wallace and Schrader
& Lewis for plaintiffs and James w. Fowler
for defendant.
Then came the case of Himebaugh, Mary
OFT & Co. VS.. c. ID. Crouch. Charles w.
Brown acting for the plaintiffs and S. 7. Par
sons for defendant. The following jury were
empaneled: R. w. Rowland, Bradford
Johnson, l.. P. Gould, Titus r. DeWolf, B.
Ferguson, Fred Geiger, E. c, Kyle, J. J. Doe,
NJ. Cameron, w. w. Driver, Pat Dillon, V.
c. Currrier. After trying the cause, plaintiffs
counsel moved the court to instruct the jury
to find a verdict for the plaintiff upon the I'M
disputed evidence in the case, which motion
the court allowed and directed a verdict for
$2,237.1o accordingly.
Cawley Bros. Steam Heating Co. VS.. Mer-
rift II. Day and Mary E. Day was placed on
the foot Of today's call by the court, the same
being a court case.
The case of Sidney Z. Chase VS.. Thomas
Sweeney was then called and the following
jury empaneled: Henry Blair, +. c. Kyle,
Pat Dillon, +. Geiger, V. c. Currier, w. w,
Driver, r. w. Rowland, L. ?. Gould, ]. ].
Doe, b. II. Ferguson, S. E. Forsha, d. Liv-
ingston. The panel being exhausted three
talesmen were called in this case, which will
be argued during the afternoon, after which
the case of John II. Buyer vs.. Elmer G.
Stewart will be taken up.
rOMoRRoW'S CALL.
Aetna Powder Co VS.. Thomas Sweeney;
John II. Buyer VS.. L. G. Stewart; T. Sweeney,
VS.. E. Cuthbertson; Cawley Bros. Steam
Heating Co. VS.. NJ. II. & Mary E. Day;
Catherine Dryer VS.. James McCurdy IND
Elmyra b. Saultry VS. N. c. Whitfield.