The Owosso times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1897-1926, 1906-03-09
Supervisor Martin Acquitted.

| township, was nrSt called. It TOOK q
surprisingly short time to secure a jury
but part Of the regular panel being
called, and it would hardly seem posi-
BILE that there would be many people in
the county who were not quite familiar
with the cases and have some opinion
on them. The jury as finally sworn
consisted of w. E Burhans, Frank
Gillett, Geo. w. Mcclellan, G. L. Paris,
VIM. Rood and James Welch, of Owos-
so; l.. b. Boyd, of Burns VIM. Case, of
Perry; Fred Galloway, of Rush; r. A
Houghton, of Corunna; E. Lewis, of
Fairfield; Erastus Quick, of Hazelton.
Tuesday morning q. r. Lyon made
the statement for the prosecutor 1t
was that Supr Martin voted to pay
Rickman's sons $10,901 on the court
house contract after the appropriation
of $4,000 had been expended, when he
knew that the board had no right to
spend more than $1,000 year in excess
of sums legally appropriated. That
even though Mr. Martin came into the
Office late in the October session, he
ought to have known that all money ap-
propriated had been expended,
F. FL. Watson said the defense would
show that the board was not limited to
S15, 600 as the bonds had sold for S7S,-
900; that there was no statute prevent
ing the board from spending more than
$1,000 if the amount was on hand. The
penalty is for raising by tax or borrow
ing more than that amount. He
claimed that the settlement with Rick
mans did not create new obligation
but was merely paying one created at
the time of letting the original contract.
County Clerk Martin was the first
witness called. Odell Chapman object
ed to his testifying because the informa-
tion against the defendant did not
charge any offense under the law. This
was overruled. B. p. Hicks objected
for the season that the Indictment
charges an offense of an individual
member of public body. This was
also overruled. Mr. Watson also
claimed that proper certification to the
indictment had not been made by Fore
man Thomas Cooling of the grand jury,
but the Judge ruled against him. 1t
was also claimed that the money paid
Hickman was part of the original
amount secured from the sale of the
bonds. Also that the indictment charges
Mr.. Martin with an offense committed
Sept. %, 1905 when the proper date
should be Nov. 90, but the court ordered
the error corrected. The oris sinal certi
ficate of the appointment of T. S. Mar
tin as supervisor to fill a vacancy ap-
peared to be mislaid and the defense
claimed that there was therefore no evi-
dence that he was member of the
board.
County Treasurer Northway testified
that the money paid to Rickmans on
Nov. 23 was taken from the original
building fund excepting $911.25 taken
from the contingent fund, showing that
Mr.. Martin had not voted to spend over
$1,000 without the authority of the peo
ple
After the prosecution had rested its
case Mr.. Chapman asked the court to
direct verdict for the defendant be-
cause no evidence of guilt had been pro-
duced. This was denied and the de-
Tense rested. The attorneys then
argued several questions of law.
Thursday morning Judge Weist in
structed the jury to return verdict of
not guilty without leaving their seats.
Following is the Judges charge to
the jury:
Gentlemen of the Jury; The re-
spondent is charged with the specific
act Of voting for an item of S10,901.-
II, for the construction of the court
house in this county, the payment of
which involved the borrowing of the
money by the county or its levy and
collection by tax, without the same
having been authorized by the quail
HCu IuA-PiyClo VI Jllc COunly.
The defense Is that the people
authorized the construction of a court
house, not exceeding in cost $75,-
100000, and that the money author
lied was borrowed and placed in
fund separate and apart from all
other funds and devoted to the pur-
pose authorized by the people, and
that the amount voted by respondent
TO be paid was n part CT the fund so
authorized and obtained and kept and
was to pay. the last amount due up
on the contract let for the building
Of the courthouse.
On the part of the people 1t is con-
tended that while the first act of the
supervisors, under the authority con-
ferred by the people by ballot, was to
let the contract for the construction
of the courthouse, yet long before
rhe amount voted by respondent was
voted, the contract had, in fact, been
ignored and the courthouse built re-
gardless of the amount available by
vote for that purpose, and that the
money raised from the sale of bonds
authorized to be issued by the people,