The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1896-01-24

!. wait for his grist four DAYS al one
time, and put in his time by having
fight with the late Jonth. Walker
over shooting al mark. and run
ming foot race with big Indian.
| and jumping for the drinks III
|, Whisky with the late Enoch Abell.
, During this wait lie also killed "A
bear at a tree which stood al what
!. ~ now the corner of 9Th ani Jack
son streets.
As the country became more
thickly settled, and il was found the
bottom lands produced the larger
crops, some grumbling was indulg-
ed in about the dam. (Which bv
this time furnished water for an
old-fashioned saw mill as well as
the grist mill, backing water over
lands above it, and along in the
Dos some time an effort was made
to compel lis removal. but without
success. A number of times since
the same thing has been tried. both
by civil and criminal actions. but
uniformly with the same result. the
only 'od being accomplished be-
ing to give some new attorney fee
in court.
The case which has occupied
about three days of the present
term OF court, charging the Eckert
Brothers with maintaining a NUS
ance, and ob>tructing a highway.
and which was jury trial. and
ably and holly contested, by Prose-
cutor Cox and Philips for the
State. and Traylor & Hunter for
the defense. with John l.. Brett
thrown In a an amusement. result
ed a the trials heretofore have
the jury, being pretty nearly in
structed nv Judge Ely to acquit.
only being out short time until il I
agreed upon a verdict Of acquittal. 4,
The argument of Traylor x Hun
ter was logical presentation of :
heir side and carried weight with | i
I. But the address 10 the jury Of {
Prosecutor W. f. Cox for the State I
vas studious, careful and schol- :
lrly presentation of the law a he
'iewed it. and as the Supreme C
'ourt In several decisions. which he
cad. had interpreted it. and in a
ew moments he completely refuted (
ne claims made by Brett in his
talk as 10 the law If the
ase- His address was almost ex- 6
iusively legal argument TO sus- L
ain the proposition that lapse Of y
mt, without prosecution Of a con- NJ
nuous violation Of a criminal ar
'atute, did not act as a bar 10 ~
when such a violation -
"a properly presented before a ~
ourt and proven. The argument all
as 80 clear and generally convinc- 81
lg. and was sustained bv so many -,
ted legal authorities. that it is no
lghly probable a conviction would e~t
ave followed, had the case been tan
Ibmitted 10 the jury without elab- ma
ate instructions from the court
was listened Ia closely bv the
rye audience, a. well As the Jury :
ID other attorneys. and was gener- ~
y commended a. the best posi- )
: presentation of the States side. g'
The suit while nominaIly trivial. ed
s by odds the most important one ven
ard this term. both in the large MI
erests involved, and the many |.
rsonS not pa.tles to the suit.
lose financial interest would be af- =
ted either way it might be deter 49,
ned. This was recognized by = m
difficulty in securing a Jury. spp
4 the final necessity of sending Mar
nmons for men to act as jury- sam
n to parts OF the county entirely e err.
from any effect a verdict might ~
'e. II is laid the State will APP gro.
i the decision TO the Supreme =. .is. /.
rt on the legal questions involv- is.,
so that it may tie finally settled. eoa'
not like ghost, be haunting -
.ver succeeding terms Of court. HI