The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-05-10
$50 STEER IN A $4,000 FIGHT
TWO MISSOURI FARMERS VINE
WANT THEIR RIGHTS.
Four Years OF Litigation Over q Iira,,
That Either Would Have Given Ava,
Five Bouts Already and sixth
Duc--All the Township Intcre.,c ,,

MACON Mo-. May 9.--Two wealthy. do.
termined Missouri farmers are marsha,llnr
their forces for battle in the Circuit Corr
this month. The bone of Intention i,
scrub steer, that might possibly bo ap.
praised at $50 II the owner was hunting n
tender DOT buyer.
This nondescript animal is rapidly getting
into the thoroughbred clas- basinR it,.
value upon It's cost. During the four wears
Of litigation through which it has lived and
thrived, the contestants have piled up costs
to the extent Of 81, COO not counting tho
lawyers fees and incidental expenses
The history Of the case went 10 the Appel
late Court at Kansas City last year in the
shape Of a stenographic record that cost
$3.50 alone. 1t is a volume of oAl pages
and Is complete in every respect save for
a picture of the innocent beast the litiearts
are warning over. That would have ap-
peared in the record, also, the defendant
having driven it fifty miles to court for the
purpose of exhibiting it TO the jury and
having it photographed for the Appellate
Court, but the Circuit Judge ruled tho
evidence inadmi-sible, and the defendant
saved his exceptions.
John Messengale, the plaintiff, is typical
Westerner. He is about go, large. energetic
and endowed with disposition that brooks
no suggestion of coercion.
II poor man came along and wanted
to take a couple of steers from his farm
until he could raise the money to pay for
them the chances are that Messengale
would give them to him without other Sc
curity than belief in his honesty If
regiment of soldiers undertook to remove
from his premises yellow dog that Mes
sengale knew belonged to him, he would
stand up and empty his Winchester at the
soldiers until he was shot down.
So, when one evil day, in September,
1890, his scrub steer wandered out of the
fold, down the highway and into the pasture
of his neighbor, Ellie +. Rice, Just across
the line in Charlton county, Massengale
felt that the lost steer was worth more than
all the rest of his possessions put together
He told Rice that his animal had certain
peculiarities about it that no other steer
on earth possessed.
Rice said he had a steer answering the
same identical description, even to the
branding on the ear. So he told Massepgale
he could not have it. Both men could have
lost dozen such animals and never have
felt il, but when Missouri cattleman UNDER
takes to identify steer he feels that his
reputation is at stake. and that his jud G.
ment must be maintained, even II II rips
the country up one side.
So the two farmers who had long been
friends and neighbors went to law, Each
had his own following OF witnesses, who
were as positive regarding the ownership
of the animal in dispute as the principals
were.
Massengale had lead of because Rice
held possession. He brought suit In re-
pleyin before justice in Bee Branch town.
ship in Charlton county.
At the first trial. on Dec. 2, 1899, the Jury
disagreed. At the second trial, on Jan.
o. 1900, Mr.. Massengae won out. but Rice
promptly went into the Circuit Court.
When the case was called in the Charlton
county Circuit Court at Salisbury in Febru-
airy. 1900, there was reinforcement OF
a recruiting officer had been out hunting
up witnesses. The case ON that occasion
was bitterly fought. from start to finish,
but at the roundup the jury stood Q too.
mined to win out the next time. II 1t took
the hoof, horns and hide of. The con-
troversy had crowded out everything else,
and it was the one ambition OF their lives to
win. ~
following on his case than on his farm.
The case went on again in September. 1900.
The trial lasted a week and the defendant
got the verdict.
Undaunted by the extent Of the record
and the expense of getting it up, the plain
tiff promptly instructed his lawyers to
ascend the next step in the legal ladder
to the Appellate Court.
The appellant asked that the judgment he
reversed, mainly on the ground that enc of
the defendants counsel had told the jury
in his closing argument that Massengale
had obtained his start and made his money
rounding up unbranded cattle III the West,
and stealing and branding them as his
own" and. further. that there they called
we call it plain out cattle stealing, and Mas
sengale has not lived here long enough
to know the difference
Massengale would have demonstrated
with the attorney. who used such language:
but his lawyers held him in his seat, and
there was no blood spilled. The Appellate
Court at Kansas City reversed the judg-
ment on account Of the language used by
defendants counsel and strongly repr'-
manded the lawyer for his indiscretion.
That made the fifth hitch, and the two
farmers are now moistening their hands
for the sixth bout. They have three law
yers apiece and a whole township of witt
nesses
After the decision in the Appellate Cour.
some friends Of both parties who desired
gale and suggested that as he had been
q victor in the last engagement 1t might
be wise to consent to compromise OF Inc
case before spending any more money.
Compromise" said the big Macon county
1of course III compromise. I
am willing to do what's fair. But, as
basis for negotiations, you tell Rice that
he'll have to drive that steer back into my
pasture. When he does that, gentlemen.
hen I will meet you on any reasonable
grounds
And that g the way the matter stands
Meanwhile the old steer Is contentedly
amid the Charlton county cane
brakes, all unmindful of it's greatness
md only interested in getting plenty 10