The L'Anse sentinel., 1907-05-11
COURT CONTINUED
UNTIL TUESDAY
At Which Time Case Of charette VS..
Village OF L'Anse win be Heard
Before New Jury.


Court House. in this village. Mon
day morning a, IL O'clock, Hon. A.
7. Streeter, circuiI judge. presiding
There were no criminal cases N
the calendar for this term. the list
comprising only eases under he
headings of issues OF fact, three
trials by Jury. and one by court,
while three were slated in chancery.
Following is the calendar:
ISSUES OF FACT-TRIALs BY JURY.
Patrick Brennan VS.. John o. v.
Zell-n. Assumpsit.
Christ Stark VS.. John O. Maxey
and Samuel d. Thompson. Case.
Joseph Charette. administrators, VS..
the Village Of L'Anse. Case.
ISSUES OF FACT-TRIALs BY COURT.
Joseph Bouch VS.. Simon D. Mur-
ply. Default.
CHANCERY.
Joseph N. Clement VS.. Josephine
Clement. Divorce. f>
Joseph j. O'Connor VS. Charles
Hebard & Sons, Inc, and Auditor
General. Remove cloud from title.
Hearing of petitions of following
named persons for admission to citi
zenship: Erick Julius Erickson,
Isaac Moilanen, Robert Price, Matt
Warila.
Triangle Land Co. vs.. Walfred
Been. Bill to quiet title.
Monday afternoon the first case
TO occupy the attention OF the court
was that of Patrick Brennan VS.. DR..
John O. v Zellen. After occupying
considerable time it was discontin-
ued and the matter finally settled
out OF court.
The next case, and one which had
previous to its appearance in court,
aroused considerable interest, was
that Of Stark VS.. Maxey and Thomp
son. This case was heard at the
opening Of court Tuesday morning
and occupied the entire time until
nearly noon, at which time an ad-
journment was taken. During the
adjourn ment satisfactory arrange
ments were made between the two
parties and the case discontinued.
The case OF Joseph Charette, ad-
ministrator, VS.. the Village OF
L 'Anse, was the next one to come
up for trial. This particular case
attracted large number of people
to the court room, and at nearly
every session standing room was at
a premium. From the beginning of
the trial until Wednesday afternoon
at $50 clock, the time was devoted
entirely to hearing the testimony Of
the various witnesses, and at the
conclusion of which the Jury was ex-
cused until the following morning at
ten O'Clock. The remainder OF the
afternoon was spent by the counsel
for both sides presenting the case
to the court on law points.
Thursday morning little or moth
ing vas done, it having developed
that during the time intervening
which the jury was of duty one of
the jurors had disobeyed the instruc-
tions given by the Judge, and to
which exceptions we're taken by the
, counsel. At the opening OF the
court 10 the afternoon the jury was
the target Of a severe address from
the Judge, who at the conclusion OF
his remarks discharged the entire
panel and ordered the offending one
brough: before him, also instructed
the clerk to empanel new jury and
be prepared to continue the case on
Tuesday morning OF next week at 10
o'clock.
The offending iuryman then ap-
peared with his attorney and made
ample apology for his wrong-doing.
Counsel for both sides recommended
the courts ienency, and after ex-
planning to the offending juror the
enormity OF bis wrong-doing he was
discharged by the court.
In the case Of Clement VS.. Clement,
divorce. decree was granted in favor
OF complainant.
10 the matter Of o'Connor VS..