The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-05-26
IT'S A BAD BUSINESS.
This NeighbOrhOOd Quarrsling
Frowned Upon By the Judge.
OSE MOULDER YOUTHS
c. A. Johnston's Case Continued
for WILHELM the Matter of
Those Explosion Suits
An Attachment.

Butte, May 25.-Neighborhood quar-
| rels received a slight discoura cement
IN Judge Speers court this morning.
| some time ago John Stafford was con-
Nicted in Walkerville court OF assault
ana battery committed on Mrs.
fleming duringa neighborhood scrap"
lie was fined $40 and costs and ap-
pealed. A few days ago a jury in Judge
Speers court foGnd him guilty again
or assault, and the court this morning
gave him the limit under the verdict,
500 and costs, and ordered him COM
mltted TO jail until IL was paid.
Il have no patience with these neigh
borhood brawls." said the court. ut
is out of this character of affairs that
murders grow and which put the coun-
ty TO great deal of cost. The jury
was very lenient with you in finding
you guilty only Of assault, when y,'u
should have been found guilty of as
sault and battery. Some OF your
friends have asked me to be easy with
YOU and l will be easy to the limit OF
the law"
William and Arthur Moulder. who
are charged with incorrigibility. were
In court this morning, but on state
ment of their attorney that some rela-
tive from England was on his way to
this country to look after them, the
court put their time for pleading off
another week. 1t is probable that they
will be saved from going to the reform
school.
c. a. Johnston, against whom half a
dozen different informations have been
filed during the past two years. charg-
inS him with larceny as bailee, had
been ordered to be I'm court again this
morning, but the county attorney re-
quested that the matter go over for two
weeks and announced that there was
a prospect that some disposition would
be made Of the case.
Attorney &. l.. Campbell argued
motion to quash the indictment against
him charging him with forgery. He
argued that the grand jury had not
been legally impaneled and had not
taken the proper oath. He said that
when his case came properly before
the court he would be ready TO meet
the accusations against him. The point
raised by Mr. Campbell was argued at
length and the court then took the
matter under Amusement
In the damage suit Of John Forester
against the city. demurrer to the COM
plant was overruled and the defend
ant granted five days to answer.
In the two suits for damages for
Islander of Mrs. Mueller against NJ. Z.
Meyer, the plaintiffs motion for judg-
ment on the pleadings were overruled
and the defendants motion for more
specific allegations was sustained.
Wilson Brothers to-day commenced
an attachment suit against William
an account.
In Judge McHatton's court this after
noon a new lot of demurrers to a num-
Der of complaints in the explosion cases
were argued. Eight grounds OF demur-
rer were set up, but only two were
considered worth arguing. In two
cases. in which the plaintiffs are repre-
scented by Attorney Shelton. the de-
murrers alleged that the parties did
not have the legal capacity to sue. and
that IL was not shown that there was
not other heirs besides the plaintiffs 1t
was claimed by the defendants that
the allegations that the plaintiffs were
the sole heirs were conclusions of law.
The second point Of demurrer. which
went to all of the complaints in the
cases represented both by Mr.. Shelton
and Mr.. Kinsey. was that the com
plants did not state facts sufficient to
constitute a cause OF action, and alleg-
ing that the complaints themselves
showed that the injured parties had
been guilty of contributory negligence
and that they were trespassers on the
defendants property.
II was argued by j. l.. Wines and
other attorneys for the Kenyon-Con
nell Commercial company that there
was no duty owing the injured parties
by the defendant company, and the
fact that powder was stored. as al
legged, i'm violation of law, made no
difference a number of cases We're
cited. but the plaintiffs attorneys con-
tended that they had no bearing on
the cases. as i'm the one cited that the
defendant had not been guilty of a
violation Of law. The plaintiffs at
torneys also claimed that the question
Of contributory negligence was a mat
ter of defense and could not be raised
on demurrer. besides they held that
contributory negligence must be shown
to have been the cause of injury, while
i'm these cases the cause was the explo-
sion. Judge Mediation overruled the
demurrers on all points and said II was
preposterous 10 say that the defendant
did not owe a duty to the public at the
time IL stored the powder in violation
of law. AS to the question Of contribu-
tory negligence. that would be a ques-