Barbour County index., 1910-03-02
TO THE SUPREME COURT
George Horton Convicted of Bur-
glary. His Attorney Appeals to
Supreme Court. Court
Adjourned Saturday

The trial of George Horton who
was charged with burglary and
larceny, which was on trial when
the Index was being printed last
week, resulted in conviction of
burglary in the second degree, the
penalty for which is from five to
ten years in the state penitentiary.
The case went to the jury WedDes-
day evening and the verdict was
returned shortly after midnight.
On the first ballot the jury is said
to have been evenly divided-six
being for conviction and six for
acquittal. On the next ballot four
came over for conviction, on the
next another broke over and on the
next all voted for conviction. The
verdict was compromise, the jury
acquitting of the charge of stealing
the jewelry but convicting on the
charge of breaking into the store.
The case was tried very thoroughly
by both sides and we think all the
lawyers did their entire duty, but
the attorneys for the state are
claiming the major portion of the
glory.
On Friday G. M. Martin, Hor-
tons attorney, filed a motion for a
new trial. The motion was ar
gued on Saturday and overruled
by the court, and the prisoner was
sentenced to the penitentiary. Mr..
Martin at once gave notice of an
appeal to the supreme court. Ex-
ecution was stayed twenty days
pending the perfection of the ap-
peal. At the end of twenty days
he will be taken to the penitentiary
unless he furnishes a bond or the
supreme court comes to the rescue:
A suit for damages entitled H.
w. Skinner VS.. The A. T. & S. F.
Ry. Co. was tried before the fol-
lowing jury on Thursday, Febru-
ary 24th:
A. F. Buckles T. L. Sale
MA. Lambert Paul Adams
+. A. Gibson A. A. Fausett
& John Stone Frank Upham
) c. H. Stewart G. G. Price.
Two horses and a mule were run
into a barb wire fence by Santa
Fe engine and badly cut. The
company failed to fence its right
of-way. The jury awarded Mr..
Skinner $50 damage and $50 at
torney's fees. The suit was for
$235. The company will proba.
bly, appeal to the supreme court.
Seward l. Field represented the
plaintiff and Noble & Tincher of
this city, and ]. D. Houston of
Wichita represented the Santa Fe.
The MacGregor tax Injunction
case was heard by Judge Gillett on
Friday. Noble & Tincher repre-
sented Col. MacGregor, and County
Attorney Field and Samuel Griffin
represented Barber county. The
matter has been in controversy
since March 1909, when DR.. |. W.
Stout assessed a contract held by
Col. and Mrs. MacGregor, by the
terms of which they conveyed their
farm to H. w. Skinner. Col. Mac
Gregor holds that it is merely an
option contract and therefore non
assessable, while Deputy Assessor
Stout, County Assessor Bailey,
County Commissioners Lake,
Wadsworth and Harbaugh and At.
torney General Jackson, as we'll as
all of the members of the State Tax
Commission, speaking as lawyers
and individuals, held that it was
, taxable. In the beginning County
, Attorney Field and part of the
county board held that it was not
taxable but subsequently Col. Mac.
Gregor used this contract in the
purchase of other land and this &C.
tion County Attorney Field and the
entire Board decided removed all
optional features from the contract
and it became taXableithe same as
if it had been a promissory note
The evidence of MeSsrs. MacGregor
and Skinner was directed toward
establishing that it was an option.
al contract but the evidence O.
Commissioners Wadsworth anc
Harbaugh and County Attorney
Field pointed strongly in the op
posite direction. Col. MacGregol
admitted that the contract wa.
drawn by Mr.. Field at his direc
tion and that it was entirely salts
factory to him at the time. Later
however, when Mr.. Skinner callec
his attention to the fact that i
might be taxable, he became dis
satisfied with the contract. Col
MacGregor made number of ad
missions that weakened his case
materially.