Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1905-04-28
CIRCUIT
COURT
DOCKET
Judge Burnett ReverSeS Dc
ciSiOn in Salem Poll
Tax Cases .

/ 'ouII convened TINS morning, Judge
/ Burnett presiding. The cases Of Harry
Wright and Charles Monte, charged
with murder in the first degree, on the
grounds that they were the persons who
conveyed the guns inside the pouiten.
tiary which Tracy and Merrill used in
their escape from there two years ago.
came up. Wright and Monte were ar.
raigned on April 2lst Of this year. and
on the cath pleaded not guilty to the
charge found in the indictment. To.
day was the time set for fixing the
date Of the hearing, and promptly at 9
o clock both Wright and Monte were
brought into the court room, accom-.
panied by number of guards. +. II.
/ p'Arcy, Wright $ attorney, moved the
court that the time Of hearing the case
be continued until the July term Of
court. His motion was based upon the
affidavit Of the defendant, which. in
substance, is as follows; That for some
days prior to the time, and at the time
mentioned in the indictment. he was ia
the vicinity of Seattle, and If given
sufficient time he would bc able to
bring witnesses 10y the name of Antho.
Iny lIarmc aud Frank Cavanaugh, who
reside within three miles Of Seattle,
who will testify that he (Wright) was
in the city Of Seattle at the time Of
the crime. At this time Wright says
he does not know Of any one else who
can prove the facts stated above; but
thinks in time he might find others who
could testify as to his whereabouts at
that time. In order that his attorney
may have opportunity to go TO Seattle
and interview these two witnesses he
asked the court for a postponement Of
the case until tho July term Of court.
II. j. Bigger, attorney for Charles
Monte, asked that his client be grant.
ed delay of hearing until the same
time as Wright. Monte stated in his
affidavit that he was not acquainted in
Salem, aud that at the time mentioned
in the indictment was in the vicinity
Of Salem. and that IL would take some
time for him TO find persons who would
testify where he was at that time, be.
cause Of the fact of his knowing no
one. District Attorney John McNary
objected vigorously TO the pleas for n
postponement Of the eases. After hear
ing the arguments presented by tho AT.
torneys for both sides Judge Burnett
overrulcd the motion of the defendants
for delay, and set the time for the
trials Of the respective parties for May
22d
In the ease Of Ellis Palmer plaintid,
Va. Jos. Borduue. defendant, FOR money |
default and Judgment were rendered
for the defendant.
Ford a Co., plaintiff, vs.. l.. T.. Post
for money; settled.
Robert Burns, plaiutiif, vs.. Il. d.
Hume, defendant, for damages. A
motion TO strike out the answer was
sustained as 10 specifications !, ., 3, .,
8, and :.
ln the ease Of Charles Livosley, plain.
tin, vs. G. T.. Litchfeld and David
Steiner, defendants, an action begun in
December, 1904, in Justice Of the Peace
Turner's court, for 800 damages, and
appealed 20 the circuit court, a verdict
was rendered for the defendants This
action was over the refusal Of the de-
PENDANTS, who were judges in the city /
election, 10 allow the plaintiff 10 vote.
The reasons given for refusing the de.
fendant the right to east his ballot was
that he had not paid bis poll tax Of 90
for that year, and according 70 an ordi
nance passed by the city council was
not entitled 20 vote until the same had
been paid The plaintiff admitted that
he had left bis poll tax unpaid, but as
serted that the judges Of the election
had permitted others 10 vote who had
not paid the tax, and claimed that they
showed an unjust discrimination 10 dis
qualifying him. that they were show
ing strong partizanship in 80 doing.
The circuit court reyorses the decision
of the justice court aud finds that the /
plaintiff was not entitled 70 vote In the 1
election, neither was be damaged for
,ny sum Of money by any act Of the !
defendants nor entitled 70 damages 1
from the defendants Thee0urt fuFth'
sr deerees that defendants are entitled {
% Judgment against plaintiff, aismiss- 1
ne action and for their costs and dis 4
therein.