Barbour County index. [volume] (Medicine Lodge, Kan.) 1880-current, 1902-02-19

District Court.

OF plaintiff.
State vs.. Mrs. R. R. Haley and Fred
Haley, dismissed at cost of complain
ing witness. These parties were charged
with embezzlement in connection with
the management of the Commercial ho-
tel at Kiowa.
City of Kiowa vs.. A. A. Snodderly;
motion to quash overruled.
B. F. Kemp & Son vs.. Charles Bur
CESS: dismissed.
D. F. Allison vs.. G. c. Robertson; dis
missed.
j. K. 0. Sherwood VS.. Board of
County Commissioners; dismissed with
prejudice.
E. Il. Vaughn VS.. Leonard Hills, dis
missed at cost of plaintiff.
Josie E. Harding VS.. The Unknown
Heirs of J. NJ. Dake; judgment by de-
fault.
A. D. McNabb vs.. David Nation; dis
missed as per stipulation.
L. M. Axline vs.. j. S. Rothwell and
others; judgment quieting title.
Clara Bell Cloutman vs.. Geo. w.
Cloutman; decree of divorce granted.
F. G. Colburn vs.. Thomas F. Jones;
judgment for plaintiff.
Thomas Carter vs.. w. L. Blair; judg-
mont quieting title.
j. S. French vs. J. w. Dobson; dis
missed.
Board of County Commissioners vs..
L. G. Goff; dismissed as per stipulation.
M. L. Blankenship vs.. Louisa j.
Painter and others; judgment quieting
title.
L. w. Fullerton vs.. Frederick Fisher;
judgment quieting title.
The following cases were continued:
City of Kiowa VS.. Clyde Noble; State VS..
j. S. Jones, county treasurer; Elizabeth
Finch VS.. Goo. T. Barton; E. E. Buck
VS.. H. S. Buck; Chas. Mussen VS.. AL
bert and John Solf; Achsah Mathews
vs.. William II. Mathews.
Thos. II. Winkler vs. R. e. Lawrence;
finding and judgment for defendant
Grigsby.
@. L. Grigsby vs.. The Farmers Loan
and Trust company; judgment for de-
fendant Winkler.
o. H. Ferguson VS.. J. w. Blackwood;
judgment for plaintiff.
The case of John Young VS.. James
Jenkins was tried Wednesday before
the following jury:
l.. w. Lusk, F. M. Romig,
Samuel Eager, G. w. Kritzmire,
G. w. Berkley, Jack Chadwick,
Sim Ewalt, VIM. Lonker,
j. E. Manley, John Iliff,
D. S. Mccoy, w. F. Burns.
Mr.. Young secured verdict for $20
and costs. This was replevin action
to recover the value of two calves. 1t
is an outgrOwth of the Jenkins crlmi
nal prosecution of :wo years ago.
Young caused the arrest of jenkins on
the charge of cattle stealing and after
two trials Mr.. jenkins was acquitted,
the first resulting In hung jury.
Jenkins afterward sued Young in the
district court of Pratt county for So, 900
damages which suit is still pending.
The replevin suit is considered a sort
of off set and some regard it as a cold.
wet blanket on Jenkins claim for dam
ages
Judge G. w. Ellis, of this city is Mr..
Young's attorney and Judge j. c. Ellis,
of Pratt, is Jenkins lawyer.
The big case of the term was E..
Shore vs.. The Drovers Live Stock
Commission Co. Mr.. Shore brought
suit against the Drovers Company for
a feed bill of about 81 .2OO. The Drov-
ers claimed All offset for cattle not re.
turned at the end of the feeding season
but the jury rendered judgment in full
for the plaintiff. j. D. Parsons, of
Wichita, brother -in-law to Mr.. Shore,
placed the cattle with him to winter,
and he was the principal witness for
the defence.
The following jury sat in the case:
d. Il. Axline, L. w. Lusk,
VIM. Shuts, F. M. Romig,
G.. w. Barkley, d. s.. Mccoy,
SamI Hendricks G. w. Kritzmire,
]. E. Manley, ]. G. Clayton,
W. II. Burns, D. E. Tedrow.
The defeEse will appeal to the Su-
preme court.