The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1897-05-13


~
Tense Of "monkeying' and then insist
ed that it would not listen any longer
to the proposition. Mr.. Schneider
still insisted that the Court should
listen and finally got it to listen in or
der to FIX the records the way Mr..
Schneider wanted them fixed.
The trouble arose over motion to
allow the defense to amend its answer.
The reason of the attorneys for the
defense for this motion was on account
of newly discovered evidence evi-
dence discovered at 1890 o'clock the
night before in conversation with
former county commissioner. which
would show an error in the books of
the county treasurer under date Of
Feb. Is. 1896, and which, if admitted,
would reduce the amount claimed to
be owing the county by the bank, a
little over $1,000. This occurred in a
peculiar manner, according to the
statement of the defense. On Feb.
Is, 1896, the bank paid it's personal
property tax for 1894, amounting to
$1,0O7.25. But instead of this amount
being paid to the county treasurer
personally it was merely placed to the
credit of the county in the bank. This
was technical point in which the de-
Tense wanted to take advantage, main
tanning that the county had no right
to charge the bondsmen up with these
taxes.
There was great deal of talk after
this statement was made, Attorney
Somerville contending that if the
Court was going to rule against the
defense in the matter, he would never
make any more admissions for the
purpose of expediting trial. The
court contended that it had never ask
ed for an admission, and this was not
disputed, but the attorneys for the
State had several times on the day
previous, and that they had all been
granted. The Court then denied the
application to amend the answer as
we'll as the record of the day before to
the effect that the amount deposited
was over $4,000.
County Auditor Anderson, Treas
urer Lankard, Ex-County Treasurer
Kuenzli and O. B. Turrell were called
as witnesses, but every question was
objected to, and only a few answers
we're got in. Both sides rested, and
just after the defense moved to in
struct for the defendants the court
took recess until 80
At the opening of court Friday af-
ternoon Judge Weber asked the at
torneys for the defense if they knew
of any evidence introduced that would
be against his directing verdict for
the defendants. The Judge stated
that the defendants showed that they
had paid the full amount charged to
the bank, and that, aside from this,
there was no evidence to show that an
account previous to the bond had not
been paid and that the bank was a
depository Of the county. Mr.. Wick
wire thought different. He said that
the evidence of Messrs. Lankard and
Kuenzli would show that the county
had made prima facie case. This
evidence was all read by Reporter
Eckstein, after which the court asked
to hear from the defense. The latter
stated that it believed as Judge Web
Der did, that no case had been proven.
The court spent a few minutes
thinking over the case, when:
"Oh, we'll, 1 will direct verdict for
the plaintiff, ) but I have my doubts
about it's holding
He then wrote out verdict in favor
of the county for $3,596.2O, with in
terest at the rate of Z per cent. from
July %, 1895, making total of 49,
O4620. This was signed by G. H.
Kenney as foreman and recorded as
the verdict of the jury.
A stay of 60 days was granted. The
bondsmen will appeal to the Supreme
Court on several different points. The
motion for a new trial, on which the
appeal will be taken, will be made in
July, in all probabilities.
RETROSPECTIVE.