Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1899-10-19
Court Gases.


The case of Ida Fall, ct al vs., Jas.
M. Gelyin, for eJectment was tried
but no questions arising necessary
for the jury to answer, the Court took
the case under advisement TO render
decision later.
August Runde VS.. VIM. A. Deitz-
man, eiectment, was tried, and at the
close the Court directed the jury to
bring in verdict in favor of plaintiff.
Jas. Duncan VS. David Duncan, eject
ment. Testimony was introduced and
finding no issue to be decided by the
Jury the Court took the case under
advisement to be decided with equity
cases.
Jas. A. johnson VS. Town of Little
Grant, damages, and w. Il. Scott VS.
c. NJ. & st. Paul r. K. Co., both set
tied.
State VS. Frank Newman Jr. Plain
tiff Plead guilty to burglary in day
time and was sentenced to one year
in the State Reformatory at Green
Bay.
State VS. Fred Jewett, horsestealing.
The jury brought in a verdict of
guilty.
On Monday, Oct 16, court began
trial of State VS.. Downer Halferty.
Evidence on part of the prosecution
consumed all of Monday afternoon
and the greater part OF Tuesday fore
noon. The testimony in behalf of de-
PENDANT was offered and the taking of
it continued until about p. NJ, Tues
day, when the district attorney hav-
ing heard enough of testimony of de-
PENDANT to understand of what the de-
Tense consisted, moved the court for
dismissal of the case, at which time
he made the following statement:
May the Court please; | have up
to this time, think, got fair under
standing of what the evidence is in
this case, and of what it will be, if all
that the state knows is admitted in
evidence.
| can put no conceivable construc-
ton upon the evidence that | know of
and that has already been admitted
that would warrant me if was Juror
in convicting this defendant, and
certainly would not ask jury to con-
Wet man upon what l would not
convict him myself if were in their
place.
The complaint made to me was of
the three witnesses who have testified
directly to the act. | was satisfied,
however, from the statement of one of
them this morning that he was either
mistaken or willfnlly fabricating.
Which it is | do not know, and the
motion shall make should not be
construed, as it is not so intended, to
state whether or not the states wit
nesses have falsilied. But this much
| feel is absolutely certain, that their
conduct and transactions and language
since the fact sworn TO took place, or
was alleged to have occurred, have
been such as to their testimony of the
convincing character that testimony
to convict ought to posses.
1t was duty to bring this case that
that could not shirk, it was upon
positive evidence. ! don't dispute
this evidence now, but certainly their
conduct since has robbed the testimo
ny of the force thought TO have. And
the defendant about to be placed on the
stand. |, feeling that the evidence is
such that he ought not to be called
upon, ask the court that this case be
dismissed as it stands now.
In granting the motion Judge Glenn
entson said:
The district attorney in this case
has done only his duty. 1t was
case that came into this court by rea-
son of there being an examination be-
fore an examining magistrate. Wit
nesses in the Justices court testified
in behalf of the state. | suppose the
defense introduced no evidence at
that time and the justice upon the
evidence given of very positive
character, as you have heard it from
the witnesses for the state, did his
duty in sending the case here to this
court. The district attorney found it
here for trial and he has conscienti-
ously and ably presented it for the
state and you have now heard his con-
clusion as to what should be done in
this case; and | must state that Mr..
Howe in coming to this conclusion
and openly stating it has shown him
self to be man of honor and a dis
trict attorney who knows what his
duty is when convinced that it is
needless to continue a prosecution.
| must say that | listened to the
testimony with some misgivings as to
whether it was testimony upon which
an intelligent jury would convict.
may say. in my estimation, that the
testimony as it stands now has no
tendency to show guilt upon the part
of this defendant. and | am very glad
indeed that the district attorney has
taken this course, for think that it
is the proper course in order that the
defendant may not be charged with
escaping conviction by jury because
there was reasonable doubt. And
above all, the course taken by the dis
trict attorney will very much tend to
do away with the talk regarding this
young lady who has future before
her. observed the young lady
whilst in court and noticed her to be
an amiable looking girl and a girl
who from her appearance would seem
to be an honest girl. and there is
nothing to show that she is not.
grant the motion OF the district
attorney because l believe that is not
only proper but just that should do
so.
The jury therefore are discharged
from this case and it is dismissed up