Mexico weekly ledger., 1902-02-27
PAIGE BAKING POWDER Co.,
CHICAGO.

and reply in the discussion OF the
claim, as | had made separate report
Opposing the allowance Of the claim
| first offered motion for Mayor tc
appoint a committee TO see Fry s
Clay, attorneys for Miss Porter, to sub
nit the controversy to the Circuit
Court, which is as follows:
To Messrs. Fry & Clay, Attomeys for Miss
Rose Porter
hereby agree as a member of the
Committee on Claims Of the Coun-
Icil OF the City Of Mexico to submit
Miss Porter's account for sl64 IS,
which she has filed for allowance
against the city Of Mexico for tran
scripts she claims she made in the
Reed cases, to the Circuit Court of
Audrain county, as provided by Sec.
1893, R. S. 1899, Vol. l, Page 2s5, on the
following written evidence:
1st. All the records of the City
Council Of the City OF Mexico pertain
ing In any way to said Reed cases.
End. The letter OF Judge Mcllha-
lney to w. II. Kennan, dated Jan. IL,
1902, filed with report of committee on
said claim, and letters Of Geo. Robert
son, attorney for Mary A. and w. i.
Reed In said cases to W. II, Kennan,
dated Jan. IA, 1902, filed with report OF
committee on said claim.
3rd. The fact that the transcripts
made by Miss Porter were not accept
| ed and filed In said cases, by Judge
Mclnhanney, of the Clayton Circuit
Court, before whom said cases were
heard. That the transcripts in said
cases made by A. j. Jones, official
|StenOgrapher of the 18th Judicial
Circuit, were received, signed and filed
by the Court. All the above on the
part Of the City of Mexico.
4th. You FRY and Clay and Miss
Porter may make such statements as
full as they choose in relation to said
account and the making Of said tran
scripts by Miss Porter, In writing mot
under OATH TO be filed and read on the
hearing Of said controversy land such
other evidence Miss Porter may have,
TO be reduced TO wrltlng) before the
Circuit Court of Audrain County, Mis-
souri,, on part OF Miss Porter.
5th. All Of said evidence, both for
the city and Miss Porter, to be subject
to objections as TO its legality; but no
objections to be made as to the read
ing Of said evidence above named for
both parties on the hearing OF said
controversy before the Court.
9Th. The finding of said Circuit
Court on said claims to be final
w. II. KEENAN,,
Committee on Claims
J. @. Buchner ESQ.
Mexico, Feb. 17.-Dear Sir: What
would be costs Of filing, docketing and
rendering a Judgment on case as pro-
vided IN Sec. 793, r. 5.
w. II. KEENAN,.
The costs in the above case as stat
ed to me by W. II. Kennan win be
s2.15. ]. c. BUcKNER.
Clerk Circuit Court.
Before the motion was put, neither
Fry or Clay being present, some one Of
the council asked II Mr. Clay wanted |
1t submitted to the Circuit Court. Mr.. |
Winscott said he did not and thereupon
Mr.. Orear said he would speak for Mr.. |
Clay and that Mr.. Clay did not want
the claim submitted and the propo-
sition to submit was voted down.
l then told the Council that i'll
Messrs. Fry & Clay did abandon the
Eases as they had threatened, that
would take charge of the cases myself
'or the city until the city could en-
Dloy counsel, that there was no danger
If any advantage being taken against
The city and then l read a letter Of
mine to Mr. Robertson, attorney for
the Reeds and his reply;
5eo. Robertson. Esu.
MEXICO, NO., Feb l7.-My Dear
Sir: VIII you,a attorney for Mary A.
Reed In the case Of Mary A. Reed
Igainst the city Of Mexico, now pend
ng In the st. Louis Court Of Appeals,
gree that said court may make an
rider granting the city OF Mexico
urther time In which TO file printed
)riefs In said case? Please answer at
nee and oblige. Truly,
w. III. KEENAN,,
)ne of Committee on Claims Mexico
City Council.
ION. VIM. H. KEENAN,. Mexico, No.
MEXICO, Feb, l7.-DEAR SIR: Re-
lying to yours Of this day, asking for
IN extentiOn OF time for filing briefs
n the Reed cases, beg TO say that OF
'OurSe / would be willing TO grant any
OF time, ordinarily, but can
rot see the necessity Of entering into
my such agreement at this time, as the
,ase OF Mary A. Reed In the st. Louis
)ouIt OF Appeals will not be triable
lntil next October, and briefs are not
equired 10 be filed before September.
md as 10 the case OF W. +. Reed, that
'aSe is In the Supreme Court and will
lot be reached before 1904, probably,
md no brief viii be required until, as
'ou know, within period OF sixty days
Defore Il Is reached.
You will therefore have ample time
q either case 10 make and fiie YOUR
)riefs without any extention Of time.
Very Respectfully,
GEO. ROBERTSON.
Attorney for Mary A. and W. F.
Reed.
In addition 10 s2052.75 costs Of the
Reed cases up TO date, the greaterpart
{ which has been paid BY and is
gainst the city in the Mary A. Reed
ase, is TO be added s5o665 which
nakes the total cost Of Reed case TO
ate the sum s23564O II the eityl
'ins, II may get some Of this back-if
loses, then It is all lost and there
ill BE against the city a Judgement
{ s2soo--interext on sme one yearl