Fergus County Democrat. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1904-1919, 1906-12-04
huntOOn Files His Bill of Exceptions
Citing Forty One ALLEGED Errors
in the famous Case
TO BE DECIDED ON 18th INST
Chan Wins in Suit VS.. SIater--State
vs.. Pelican ct al Heard YeSter-
ddy--Other Court Notes.

The long looked for bill of exceptions
on a motion for q new trial i'm the fam
us Sherman case was filed last week
in the office Of the clerk of the district
court by J. G. Huntoon, attorney for the
defendant. 1t is massive document
containing 257 typewriter pages.
The matter came up for argument in
chambers before Judge Cheadle last
Saturday forenoon. Both counsel for
defense and the state appeared, but for
several minor reasons it was decided to
postpone hearing in the case until the
18th of this month, when arguments
will be made to the judge. Provided
the motion is not granted it will inn
mediately be carried up to the supreme
court
Altogether Al errors are assigned. OF
this number IS are on the admission of
exhibits. Other errors are assigned to
remarks made by the judge in the pres
ence of the jury, to the instructions Of
the court to the jury, to the refusal Of
the court to accept the Instructions Of
fered by the defense, and great many
exceptions are made to the admission
OF much evidence by certain witnesses.
II Is allie ged that the court erred in the
following, instances, as far as the testi-
mOny of Witness Wins was cOnserned:
In overruling objections to the admis-
sion of testimony in regard to confess
sions of Sherman made to WINS; in ov-
erruling objections to questions asked
him in regard to defendant being press
ed for money; in overruling objections
asked of WINS as to whether or not
of his confessions. Testimony given
by Atkins and Silverthorne in regard to
conversations had with defendant be-
fore the trial, is also cited as being in
error. Questions asked of witnesses
knight and Bennett in regard to the
kind of money used by Sherman are al
SO stated as being in error.
The Sherman case attracted atten-
ton all over the state and espe ecially
throughout Fergus county, where the
defendant was SO well known. Intense
interest is being manifested in the mo-
ton Tor Il new trlal.
In the replevin case of Bauley VS.
Slough, a verdict was brought i'm by
the jury deciding in favor of the plain
tiff. A number of witnesses were in
from the Deerfield and Stanford coun-
try. and the case attracted considerable
local attention.
The civil suit of Chan VS.. Slater was
hOtly contested for several days during
the past week. A number of witnesses
from this city We're on the stand and
several dispositions from Minnesota
parties We're read to the jury. The case
is quite an interesting one and involves
some delicate points of law. The suit
was brought against l.. p. Slater, sher-
iff Of this county. for alleged illegal at
tachment of property. 1t appears that
this attachment was ordered by the
Northwest Thresher company of Still
water. Minn., against J. w. Chan of
this city, who lives on the old Moshner
ranch one mile east of LewistOwn. The
ranch is not the property of J. w. Chan
but of his wife, according to the deeds
of record. The debt for which judg-
ment was originally prayed for was the
debt of J. w. Chan to the thresher COM
pany for threshing machine, amount
ing to an unpaid obligation of about
5000. Because the products of the
ranch, which ara the property of Mrs.
Chan, wree attached through the ag-
ency of the sheriff. suit to recover
damages We're brought against l.. p.
Slater.
Blackford & Blackford appeared for
the defendant, while Won Tobel and
Belden appeared for the plaintiff. The
jury returned verdict in favor of the
plaintiff.
The bill of exceptions on a motion
for new trial for Hedigan was settled
in chambers by Judge Cheadle last
Saturday afternoon. The motion will,
not be passed upon for two months. 1t
is thought that sentence will not be
passed upon Hedigan before his second
trial is finished His second trial will
begin tomorrow. Ryans trial will be.
gin on the 7th and will be vigorously
prosecuted.