The Idaho recorder. [volume] (Salmon City, Idaho) 1886-1927, 1907-10-10
DISTRICT COURT
ADJOURNS! !!
Severd Gases Of Double Trouble
Decided BY His Honor The
Rdmey vs. Rdmey the Only
Important Civil Case.

stNEadt Aikflt AT
the conclusion OF the Ramey VS.
Ramey case. There was only two
jury cases during the session, the
rest OF the cases we're divorce eases
and quietine Of title which we're
tried before the judge.
The following eases ~ double
trouble we're settled Ia court and a
decree Of divorce granted 10 the
plaintiffs Mary +. Spayds and
Charles II. spayds, Pearl Jarvis VS..
James T. Jarvis, Edward V. Man.
full vs.. Layina A. Manfull and Ida
Ward vs.. Geo. p. Ward. One or two
cases were stricken from the docket
and enc case proceedings along other
lines were started,
Frank l.. plummer was admitted
as an attorney and councillor TO prac
tice before this court.
The case Of George Steel, vs.. Ada
Merritt was decided by the jury In
favor OF the defendant. The Jury
was asked to decide In the case the
difference between q sale OF building
and loan stock and the stock as given
for collateral security. This case
was appealed from the probate court
TO the district court.
The case In which the most inter.
est seemed to be centered 10 was the
case OF Robert f. Ramey ct Al VS..
Louis r. Rameg ct al. The ease was
In reference TO the interests involved
in the sale OF the Rabbit Foot mine.
II was claimed by Louis +. Ramey
and the ulher heirs OF the Ramey
estate had not received their share
of the proceeds of this mine,
Ii was shown In the evidence that
the plaintiffs had ISSUED a deed TO
their interests In the property and
receipts were produced acknowledging
receipt Of the money for their In
terests. The prosecution advanced
the claim thar tnis deed given tn
Robert h. Ramey was a trust deed.
and that the defendant bad not com
piled with the provisions OF the deed
Ibe prosecution was represented
by an attorney by the name OF FISHER
from Idaho City and the defense was
ably represented hy n. j. Cowen
The jury was out hut n short time
aud brought In a verdict for the de.
fense. At no time while tney were
out were they disagreed but on som,
minor points, but In the main were
agreed from the first
From legal standpoint the attor-
ueys for both sides conducted their
case in an admirable manner with
the exception that Attorney Fisher
did not gain any sympathy from the
spectators nor the jury for his siudi-
catiye abuse and attempted yiliaca-
tion OF one or two OF the witnesses
In fact the only comment or expires,
sion on tile street the next morning
vas condemnation for his methods
IL may be all right In Boise OF
some OF the large cities TO abuse the
witness I'm a civil or criminal case
bat when a strange attorney comes
here and undertakes these methods
upon upright men and women, whose
lives have teen an open book before
the people ever since they have beer
residents ~ the community, II Is
deeply resented by the fair minded
citizens. He did 'not prejudice his
case ~ the minds 0f the Jury. be
cause 1t was composed OF class Of
men who vas above that. nor did be
beip his case In their minds by hts
methods.
Mr.. Fisher is > bsighf attorney, o
very pleasant gentleman q meet per
soualiy. and DC not believe he "a
peeted anything else tut defeat after
the evidence ~as IN the hands Of the
jury. A better lurg could not have
been selected f. aiig epinmunity, and
their verdict Is generally accepted ss
according TO the eyhierce Tie gen
eral accepted opinion among all Of
the people seeEs tn be to condemn
the ylndiciive and abusive methssis
against some q rle witneses, but
outside Of that tliey can not hst
credit Mr.. Fisher sitl much legal
acknowledgement wasins the f@sst case
for his clients thsi Tie Circumstance
would admit