The record-union., 1897-12-30
AN ELECTION BET DECIDED.
A DECISION FILED YESTERDAY
BY JUDGE HART.
The Case Grew Out Of an Election
Bet Between Joseph Hasman
and ID. j. Stevens.

Judge Hart yesterday rendered de-
cision of considerable interst, inasmuch
as it bears on points affecting an elec-
ton bet
AT the last Presidential election Joseph
Hasman and d. J. Stevens OF ELK Grove
wagered 800 each on the result IN thls
State, the former betting that Mchlhley
would carry California, and the latter
betting that Bryan would carry the
State. The money was put INTO the
hands Of John Mahan as stakeholder.
The men got into a dispute over the
point as to whether or not Mchlnley
had carried California, as Bryan had
received one of the States electoral
votes. Nahan. the stakeholder, in or
der to avoid any responsibility, paid the
money into Justice Henry's court.
Stevens came in as intervenor, and
asked that the 500 in coin deposited IN
the hands of the stakeholder by him be
returned to him, and that Hasmans $
check for 500 be returned to Hasman-
Stevens attorney. after plaintiff's evil
dence was in, asked that the complaint
in intervention be dismissed, which was
done. and Justice Henry decided that
such action left him no alternative but
to adiudge that the money be given to
Basman. with his costs, which was
done.
The case, which is entitled, Joseph
Hasman VS.. John Mahan," D.U. Stevens
intervenor was appealed to the Superior
Court, and was yesterday decided by
Judge Hart, who says, in his opinion:
This is an appeal from the Justices
to from
order and Judgment in favor of the
plaintiff herein, for the sum OF SZoo,
which had been deposited in court by
the defendant, who, in his answer uls-
claimed any ownership of or title 10 the
said sum of money, and who, IN the
prayer of his said answer, asked that
the intervenor, D. ]. Stevens, be suDsu-
tuted in his place as the defendant
herein.
The complaint charges the defend
ant with an unlawful conversion OF the
sum of money stated, it having peetl III III
the shane of check for 500 and SloO
in coin. deposited with him for some
purpose. which does not appear IN or
from the pleadings. The answer IS as
follows:
".Now comes the defendant herein
end admits, denies and alleges as fol-
lows. to-wit:
81 He denies both generally and
specifically each and every allegation IN
said complaint contained.
80. Defendant further alleges that
one d. ]. Stevens CLAIMS the money re-
ferred to in the complaint and mas de-
manded from defendant the return OF
same to him. said Stevens.
80 That defendant has no interest IN
the subject matter of this controversy
and makes no claim to the money or TIE
check mentioned in the complaint; tnat
both money and check were leff with
defendant by plaintiff and sald -. j..
Stevens. and as the latter claims the
money defendant is willing 20 deposit
the same in court and also to deposit
the check. and asks that said ID. }. Stew
ems NAV be brought in as a party de-
fendant and substituted in lieu of this
defendant. so that complete determl-
nation of the entire controversy may be
had and the money and property restor-
ed to the person in whom the same may
no vested. or disposed of in such man
ner as the court may determine.
Wherefore. defendant prays that he
NAV be discharged from liability to eth
er of said parties upon paying said mon
ev into court and depositing said chech;
also that he may have his costs of suit
and such other or further relief as may
be proper: and that said D. j. Stevens
may be brought in as party defendant
and substituted in lieu of this defend
ant
In this court, the plaintiff moves lot
q Judgment on the pleadingS, Tor the
reason that the defendant, in the second
and third paragraphs of his answer, re
rounces and disclaims any ownership o1'
or title to, or any interest Whatever H.
the money and check involved in TINS
controversy. 1t may be here SAID that
the intervenor. in the Justices court
moved 10 dismiss his complaint IN IN
tervention: and his appeal from the Or
der dismissing his complaint having
heretofore been dismissed by this court,
the only parties TO the action here are
the plaintiff and the defendant
"It is claimed by the counsel for the
pIaintiff that, as the defendant in hls
answer has disclaimed any interest in
the property which is the subject of this
action and which the plaintiff alleges
belongs to him, there is no issue raised
by the pleadings, and therefore plaintiff
IS entitled TO judgment.
"As a matter of fact. there is an is
sue rendered by the pleadings. In the
first paragraph of the defendants an
swer he denies, generally and specifical-
lv. the averments of plaintiffs COM
plaint. This general denial puts in issue
all the material facts of the case While
the second and third paragraphs appear
10 be inconsistent with the general de-
NAL, nevertheless. under our system OF
pleading, inconsistent defenses are per-
rnissible and sustained by long and un-
broken line of decisions by the Supreme
Court Of this State.
"The motion for Judgment on the
HEADINGS viii be denied.
Articles of Incorporation.
s4s.1.s. - sr,aNr~tDry-a soy NCGrf1 NeS-