Arizona republican., 1902-03-20
VOLUME OF BUSINESS
Disposed Of h the Supreme Court
 Yesterday.

'rhc t-,rita.ial supreme ,ourt dis ,sed of a vast volume or business, ,,, yesterdays haiI session. An adjouri,- ...zat was taken tntil this mo"ninr- There is very Ifttle more to h- done and tle court will br tdiaaraeJ t. lay. per haps tc sc..c date in May
 Amc-S the matt="s cf lecaI inysces- ! fore the coart was the petition os Fl !. | Isol fa- d writ Cf ma9dalnu: against the sheriff of 4Iaric@o.: county. directing the sheriff to issue 10 tho pc titioE -r a license 10 conduct a saloo. within a half mile of the city limits 0t Phoenix. The license had been denied under law passed by the late IsSisla ture providing that a license for q sa- lCc1 so located could be issued only urcn a petition signed by persons rep IascntinG two-Jhird5 Cf the taxable Tsrc yerty within a radius Of three miles cc the proposed saloon. The applica- ton for the writ was made early in tse January term e tha eourt, hut wa= not acted upon until yesterday. whca tnc petition i1r 2 i,eremptcry mar oaU.us was denied and the altsrnatiy- writ was Order5I quasle i.
 Tn tha case of the CGJrz Graads Min ing company vs. W. C- Green et al spT s. vs. AXel W. Haueabcrg an. J3u-e= shirley. appellants. d uotian ,o dismiss the appeal was granted anG later i1 the sessicl notice was give I.s- IJ6Ga Hawkins e ;.H appeal to th- 5ni;sd States supreme court This liti- aaCicl was begun ucc-s than q year ;Eo hy the appellants to prevent q set t.-r.cnt. f the earlier case cf the Co5I Graada ,ompany asains0 Greene ara his associates. i pi-a fer intarventics. by Halle aborg and. Shirley was nearj by JUdge Street and dismissed. II was from this judgment that th- appeal j;sst disrIissed Was taken.
 n the cases Of Martin Gould J. D. NE&Tllr and Tom f;rCrkila:l against ce-.- tain cf ire north side canal companies s1G ..hi had ben tii 5 hT .iudS- Street and appealed ta th- fast term O. the SUure me court. the judgment of th l.v-T court was modified in accordance with the opinion of the court in th f1nouS :5Iosser cas-.
 Tn iudgemeEJ ar th5 lower cour1 wes versed in the case or Ffenr. iiaUpt- appellant. Vs- NsriecDa county ;prlea. This vas &n action far dam ages. Eaupt Was the cWner c: hcuse st Gil, Bend. That rIace r-as visite.
 
 cc-ucc of a h5rc:~ eaGaavcr by the U lrd f health to let no guilty diph- thcri1 germ e=capa. tha house cf Hauu1 was burned with au its contents iiau9t- unable to c1:re C terms of set tltmeHt with the board of supervisors. brought suit against the county and Was given q judgment but net for sa large an amount as he believed | ought to ha~5. He accordingly ap- pealed. Tke cas- is rerna nde,. fc. trial
 In the matter cf GiaIicG3sa county. appellant, vs. !. NJ Burnett. auyellle-. from this county, twenty days were al Icwd for the til5ns os brief and reply. This is the case fn which the appelle brought suit against the suI -rviSo-s tn compel the allowance ci claim D.. him fer fe-5 as jusrfca or the peace. The case Was tried last Saturday an,: the appellee was given judgment i5. the amount sued fer.
 ln the case cf G.ae1E.sv. appellant; -Vs- Holmes. appellee. Aiarico.a county tae Judgment of the lower court was ;.iiisr,e1. n Goldman. administrator