The Nezperce herald. (Nezperce, Idaho) 1900-1957, 1908-03-26

q The Nezperce story relative L

Auc stotJ ciauHc
the prosecution of c. B. Watkins
warehouse man at Greer, does nc
tell the story of the question at issue
said E. w. Eaves, manager of tn
Vollmer-C Clearwater company. whe
asked relative to the Nezperce report
s'In the FIRST place, the Idah'
warehouse Law does not require th'
delivery of the identical grain stores
/. by the farmer. but simply requires tn
surrender of grain of any equal grads
and provides against the co-minglins
of grades. This point was we'll es'
tablished by the courts in the case
arising at Genesee. The real issue
in the Nezperce case is the question
of prior right. The grain in ques-
thin vas m~ortgaged to the vollmer-
Clearwater company and also to
Nezperce people. When the de-
mand for the grain vas made upon
the warehouse mar he deferred the
delivery until the question of rights
could be established. The county
attorney was not informed of the
proceedings, nor was a change of
venue to an unprejudiced court
granted" continued Mr.. Eazes,
sand the parties bringing the action
had not paid nor rendered the ware
house charges on the grain in ques-
ton, and we're therefore in no posi-
ton to demand its delivery"
The above statement was publish
ed in the Lewiston Evening Teller of
March IA under the heading of
More Light on Controversy" but
would more properly come under the
heading of another effort to give US
some more "Hot-air." What a grea.
satisfaction it must be to Mr.. Eaves
for him to believe that he can make
the people believe such statements.
1t had nos been the intention of the
Herald to discuss the merits of this
case through its columns, but we had
preferred to let the matter rest until
the courts could have an opportunity
to pass upon it, and IN reporting it
as a news item after the preliminary
examination had only briefly men
toned, in a general way, some of
the facts brought out at the hearing,
but when d statements are cues
We want to know where We
ire wrong. /,
Mr.. Eaves saysthat the grain was
nortgagedtothe vollmer-C Clearwater
company and also to Nezperce peo- !
lie and IT vas a question of prior :
light. Section TOO of the Penal :
ode of the state of Idaho reads as
pillows: Every mortgagor of :
roperty mortgaged in pursuance of
,e provisions Of chapter 115, sec !.
on 1881, of the Civil Code, Who'll
lille such mortgage remains un-
in whole or in part. vilfully
moves from the county or counties
here such mortgage is filed, or
.stroys, coneeals, sells or In any1
amer disposes of the property
ortgaged or any part thereof, with
It consent Of the holder of the
,rtgage, is guilty of larceny" =,
It few people On the prairie realize =;
lat a tendef-hearted, humane cor
the Vollmer-C Clearwater
'npany is-afrzid to enforce its
gal right for fear Of hurting some in,
IN Who has violated the laws. Is he
not the custom of this company ms
len you take the grain to them and
it to their warehouse, on Au
Iich they have a mortgage, to oul
her make the tickets out to them 7.
YES or take the grain and credit Ma
farmers note with 80 much7I
ter an investigation We have failed dut
find that this grain was mortgaged full
any one furthermore, these ala
xets we're presented to this COM not
" on different occasions during bel
past three months and the com Rul
y had ample time and notice if San
y had a mortgage on the grain 9th,
ave protected themselves. having R
the grain in their possession all men
time, provided they had not rev.
1t and shipped /. out. Then if pre-
A.. fhnf fk~x. "a - ---