Arizona republican., 1899-10-10
THE OCTOBER TERM
The Grand Jury Already Returned
 Three Indictments.

1
 1 The October term of district court
 was opened yesterday. The business
 of the day consisted almost wholly of
 the organization of the grand jury and
 the calling of the calendar. Several
 members of the grand jury having been
 excused, a special venire of six was or
 dered and the body was sworn in. The
 members are Henry E. Kemp, fore
 man, Sylvester Moot, Edward Elsie, D. N. Ambler, B. F. Johnson, E. J. Ben
 nitt, Dave Goldberg, w. A. Kimball, J. E. Price, s. s. Stout, Thomas King, George H. Archibald, H. B. St. Clair.
 c. NJ. Sturges, Aaron Cummings. C. F. Chapman, F. B. Devereux. Lincoln
 Fowler. M. J. Rich, J. M. Creighton i and s. J. Nicholson. The grand jury retired and entered upon it's work with so great dispatch that shortly before 3
 o'clock, the hour at which the ball
 game was advertised to begin. 1t returned a report containing three
 indictments. The court was not in session and the jury was discharged
 The indictments were not made public.
 The resignation of c. H. Holmes as court stenographer was entered on the
 records, as was the appointment of his successor, w N. Tiffany. MT. Tiff fanys appointment had been decided
 on from October l, on which day his resignation as the governors private secretary went into effect. Paul R.
 Frost, on the motion of c. M. Frazier. was admitted to practice on a certifi- cate from California and William L. English, late of Washington, D. e.
 was admitted on the motion of C. r. Ainsworth
 Several cases were set for trial, among them three of the water cases representing the three varieties of all the eases pending. It is probable that none of the others will be tried The three test cases are Slosser vs the Salt River Valley Canal company, and Gold against the Maricopa Canal company, October Il, and Shoot against the Maricopa Canal company, October 12.
 The last proceeding of the day was an interesting, and at the same time very much muddIed one. It was the hearing of a motion for the sheriff to show cause why return should not be made upon an order of sale in the case of Annie M. Gregory vs J. M Gregory A judgment by attachment had been rendered the plaintiff for S, 300 last January on a pre-nuptial agreement or note. The only property found was a note and mortgage given the defen- dant by his son, B. M Gregory. for something less than $6OOO, and this mortgage was in the hands of E. S Wakelin, who was holding it as collat- eral for loan of $250 to J. M. Gregory The order of sale contemplated the payment of the Wakelin note out of the proceeds, or rather the sale of the mortgage note, subject to the Wake lin note. Last July the Wakelin note was taken up by w. M Mayer on it's payment with interest amounting to s284
 At the sale the mortgage note was bid in by the attorneys for the plain tiff for $5,200 leaving balance of the judgment and costs of about $500, to say nothing of the Wakelin claim, or rather the Mayer claim, Judge Kibbey, Mayors attorney, cOntending that he now stands in Wakelin's shoes. The sheriff's office suggested to the bid ders that they deposit the amount of the Mayer claim, leaving it's posses sion to be contended for afterwari. They declined to do so and a day or two ago the writ died in the sheriff's hands leaving the property unsold and the case with prospect of having to be begun over again. Deputy Sheriff Boyd made this statement of the pro ceedings in court and Messrs. Miliay and Lyman proposed to make a motion for the sheriff to show cause why the certificate of sale should not be issued, contending that the or der of sale did not specify the pre- vious payment of the Wakelin claim. The sheriff's theory was, that if it were not previously paid the result of a wrangle between the attorneys after l ward might be the payment of it by the sheriff.
 Judge Kibbey happened to be pres ent and said that though he was May er's attorney the case was one in which he had no interest; that it was a matter between the plaintiff and the | sheriff's office and he could not re- frain from saying that the sheriff was right.
 Thus three-cornered discussion arose. Once, when Mir. Lyman was talking, Judge Kibbey offered a sug- gestion. 'I am talking, Judge Kip bey," said MT. Lyman with more than professional acrimony. T was just | now, MT. Lyman,'' replied the judge with Ostentatious pOliteness. The | judge kept reminding the court and the ! plaintiffs attorneys that he was not in the discussion. After awhile the court i suggested that the proposed motion | with respect to the sheriff was not the i best way to proceed. Let us continue this hearing" said he, ''and see if We | cannot find some way to reach Brother l Kibbey." If they can't reach him a | very expensive suit will be tried lie | noVO.
 Joseph H. Dorety, Oscar T. Richen- bach, Irving Lockwood and W e. Key holds are among the San Franciscans who arrived in the city yesterday and