Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1897-09-24

STATE OF IOWA. GO
County 90.
1, Charlotte Daubney, being duly sworn 10, on oath
going petition read and that the statements
therein made are true as | verify believe.
CHARLOTTE DAUBNEY.
Subscribed in my presence and sworn to before
me this 18th day OF September, 1897;
Norman WILIEIT:
Judge G. r. Willett, the well known
attorney CT DEBORAH, and who for
many years has been a member and
prominent leader of the republican
party of northeastern Iowa, publishes
the following card:
EDITORS DEBORAH REPUBLICAN,:
notice in the last issue of city pa
per in it's editorials the following
'In reference to the case of Dobney VS..
Daubney is it not a fact that the case
was brought out for political purposes,
and that Mr.. Bailey was compelled to
have the second suit brought to avoid
apologizing, as he had agreed to do
in former issue, and that collision be-
tween himself and the attorneys is
shown by the fact that the notices of
suit were in Mr.. Bailey's possession,
presumably for his approval, before
served upon DIR. Daubney? That they
have made it an equity case SO that
DR.. Daubney will probably be unable to
have it tried at the next term of court,
though he is now ready and anxious
for trial?"
1t is not fact that the case was
brought out for political purposes. 1t
was brouht in the usual course of pro-
fessional business under retainer from
Mrs. Charlotte Daubney, who claims
she has been wronged by the Daubneys.
No second suit has been brought.
We caused DIR. Daubney to be sum-
moned before Judge Fellows in vaca-
ton to be examined in regard to the
matter, thus giving him an opportunity
to clear himself of the charges made by
Mrs. Dobney. DR.. Daubney was sworn
and examined with regard to the mat
tiers in controversy. The result of the
testimony given by DR.. Daubney, and
certain testimony of which we had
knowledge, convinced us that Mrs.
Dobney had been wronged by the
Daubneys to the extent of 81, 1000. Hence
an action was brought which we have
faith we shall win; at least, we shall
use our best endeavOrs to right the
wrong.
The statement that this action was
brought in collision with Mr.. Bailey,
is mere nonsense.
The notices were in the hands of the
sheriff for service upon the Daubneys;
Mr.. Bailey had asked for copy of the
notice after same was in the hands OF
,, the sheriff, and we let him have one
Mr.. Bailey had not seen the notice be.
! fore.
action was broue hit in equity and not al
law. A court of equity is the proper
: place in which to bring an equitable
! action. Perhaps the editor knows
, , more about our business than we do
but even if we had brought the actor
: at law to please the editor and DR.. Daub
= ney, it would not have advanced thu
trial of the cause, for there will be NJ
u jury at the next term.
Perhaps this wise editor did no
: know this.
= In regard to DR.. Daubney's READINGS
Z and anxiety to try the case: Let hin
y possess his soul in patience; we will
reach the end in due time. Weslncere
: ly hope he will, when the decree
= rendered be as ready and anxious t
=, right the wrong with which he
II charged, as it is claimed he is now t
u try the case.
IS The business of Willett & Willetv
st exclusively a law business. and W
le never question client either abou
t his politics or religion, nor about tn
n politics and religion of his opponen
Neither does it matter if the opponer
's happens to be running for an Office.
81 G. r. WILLETT.
,e