Arizona republican., 1906-05-13
A FULL DAYS WORK
 IN SUPREME COURT
Reversal of Judgment in the SteinfeId-
 ZeCkendOrf Case
The Case of Ezra Bartlett Will Have Go to Tral-The Tucson Gambling Test Goes Over for Two Weeks The Disposition of Many Other Matters.

by telephone of the result of the case, and he replied that it was hardly nee essary for him to waste time in eX- pressing ratification, and stating that he was entirely satisfied with the ac- ton of the court.
 The case stood equally divided in the case of George Schuerman and Oth- CTS against the territory, Yavapai county. This had the effect of affirm ing the. judgment of the lower court, and it was stated in the opinion per curiam that no opinion would be writ ten, since it could be only the opinion of a minority.
 Suit had been brought by the county of Yavapai against the appellant mem bers of the board of supervisors of the county to recover about S14.0O0 which they had deducted from the taxes of the United Verde Mining company for 1902 in a compromise of a suit then pending against the company. This compromise was effected in 1903. about the time the same board. sitting as a board of equalization, had reduced the taxes of the company for that year. Its action with reference to the taxes of 1902 was taken by the board as a board of supervisors. It was thus brought within the reach of the statutes.
 The judgment of the lower court was affirmed in the case of c. O. Rouse, ap- pellant against Pima county. The ap- pelIant had sued the county for pay for his services as clerk of the board of supervisors in preparing the duplicate tax roll. It was not shown that there had been any contract between him and i the board with reference to remunera- 1 ton for this work which Is usually | done outside the office, nor was 1t l shown that the work had been done by ! the appellant outside office hours. The 1 supreme court further endorsed the ruling of the lower court that claims | against counties should be well backed 1 by statutes authorizing the payment of them.
 1 In the case of W. w. Cook, sheriff | and the United States Fidelity & Guar anty company, appellants, against ] Mary F. Purman, appellee, the judg- | ment of the court below was reversed l This action had grown out of a sher- : iff's sale of certain household goods be- i longing to the appellee to satisfy a | judgment against John Q. White. The ! reversal was based upon the fact that i there was lack of evidence as to the 1 value of the goods seized. The sheriff had been sued for S5OOO, and judgment was given the appellee for $3,50O. The valuation had been arrived at by the ! testimony of the appellee, who knew of her own knowledge the value oi many or the articles seized, but for the value of the rest she depended upon what her husband had told her they cost. The court held that this was ! hearsay evidence and that it was inn ] properly admitted. Justice DOan dis ! scented.
 In the case of the s. F., P. & P. rail- road against George Ford, appellee
 a damage suit, from this county, the Judgment of the lower court was re- 1 versed.
 In the matter of Ezra c. Bartlett whose trial has been set at Tucson foI next Monday on a charge of complicity in the Harcourt swindle of Albert Steinfeld a peremptory writ of prohi-
 bition was denied, the court holding that it was hardly warranted in inter | fering to that extent since the appli-
 cant will still have the right of appea if the Judgment should be adverse. The
 applicant was represented by Attorney John B. Wright of Tucson.
 l Yesterday was the time set for the
 hearing of the habeas corpus proceed
 ings in the case of Homer Dubois, tht
 Tucson gambler, who is serving a 270-
 day term in the city jail there, witt
 the prospect of paying a fine of $1,35(
 at the end of it, for having conducted (
 gambling business without a license Attorney w. P. Miller of Tombstone
 appeared for the applicant, and Messrs
 Lowell and Blenman for the city. MT
 Miller proposed to introduce evidenc,
 to show the state of affairs at TucsoI
 with respect to gambling. The cour
 held that it was not admissible: tha
 that was not what the present pro.
 ceedings were brought for. No othe
 action was immediately taken. bu
 later in the day MT. Miller presented
 petition for the appointment by tn,
 court of a referee to take testimony a
 Tucson as to the effect of the ordf
 nances against gambling. the objec
 being to prove that a section of one O
 them actually prohibits gambling, ir
 contraventiOn of the city charter. Tn,
 business of gambling is restricted t,
 certain blocks, and this clause of tn ! ordinance provides that gambling shal
 not be conducted within 150 feet of
 place where intoxicating liquors ar