The Alaska citizen., 1911-01-23

plalL'lNS and that II De Strlken on the ground that the plaintiffs should have rendered to the defendants the money or other Considera ion receiy- ei from the defendants under the terms of the contract which. the plaintiffs alleEe vas fraudulently en- tered into with the defendants by certain officers of the plaintiff cor p0rarion The plaintiffs not having done this. the defendants Contended in their demurrer. they could not maintain their suit. In oyerruling the demurrer the court held that in q case of this nature the absence of the tender of the money was not vital and that any such questions will be fully adjusted, if necessary, by the court at the t'me the hndl decree issues in the case.
 The petition of the Dexter Hor- ton bank of Seattle was on Friday filed in conns Ction with the suit of the Tauana Valley railroad company ys the WaShinGto Alaska bank. The petition asks that the money seized by the marshal at Cordova, while in transit 10 Seattle. be returned. The money is said 10 have been contain ed in three express packages:
 Box No. 9i, weighing l22 pounds and containing s30,0OO in gold cur rency: box No. O. weighing 1S412 pounds and containing gold bullion valued at siG,ooo and package No. 96. weighing 2 pounds II ounces. and containing currency to the amount of S25.00o.
 The money. S1U01 900, was seized January 2. pursuant 10 a writ of as sisiance issued January upon the motion and affidavit of Receiver F. W. Hawkins.
 The new petitioner. the Dexter Horton bank. denies that the money seized is the property of the Wash ing, Alaska bank, alleging that ever since DecCmber 30 it has been the property of the Seattle institu- tiOn.
 The petitioner sets forth that on December l. the Washington-Alaska bank had oygrdrawn it's account at the Dexter Horton bank in the sum of $3p.o25.07, and that F.. T. Bar nette. as president. and J. A Jack son. as yiCcpresident of the bank, with full power to do so, agreed bank. that the sum of 900
 
 express to be placed to the credit of the Washington-Alaska bank at the Dexter Horton bank
 On the strength of this promise tha Dexter Hcrton bank paid drafts aggregating Sl3l ,392.15 up to De- Cemler 2S.
 On December 2S. when the Wash ington-Alaska bank sent notice to the DeXtor Horton bank that the sum of $101,OO0 had been forward ed by express, the Dexter Horton bank continued to cash drafts until they had totaled $143 26O.13 on Jan nary ,. By January II this amount had been reduced to $141, ,407S9
 The petitioner denies any knowl- edge of the approaching insolvency of the WashingtOn-Alaska bank The Dexter Horton bank states that the writ of assistance secured by the receiver was served without the pc ti,ioner being given notice.
 The petitioner asks to be heard in court 10 support his petition and to show cause why the order of January may be rescinded, the writ of assistance quashed, and a further order directing the receivers and the United States marshal to restore the money.
 In handing down an opinion as to cost bills in the cases of T. T. Qually and Andrew Ness vs. Thomas P. Aiken and Sam Hagan vs. E. A Williams, H. H. Mcdonald and Mrs Dora Williams the court ruled that witness upon proper showing that his testimony was necessary and ,.r,l l. !, before the court in good faith for the purpose of such witness alone whether subpoenaed or not, is en- titled to witness fees for the actual number of days called as witness in the case. and mileage for the dis tance within 100 miles of the court Beyond that distance, by special pro- vision of the code, if a witness is desired for special reasons, and his oral testimony is desirable before the court or jury to explain plats, documents, etc, and this cannot be well accomplished in a deposition, a special subpoena is provided which, upon proper application to the court is granted and which entities the party to the presence of the wit ness in court"
 The trial Of the case of w. J. McNamara ct al ys. G. H. Schaupp ct al was commenced on Thursday before a jury. The suit is one in which the plaintiffs seek to recover on a note signed by two members of a partnership of five, three of the partners resisting on the ground that they were not parties to the transaction. The stated facts in the case are that about two years ago Messrs. Schaup, Mcdowell, Par sons, brennan and Hamilton had a lay on Nos. and Little Eldorado. Schaup and Mcdowell are alleged to have made deal for the purchase of S5 feet of No. f, for which they paid part cash and gave note for the balance, signed by themselves At the time of giving the note they stated that they would have to see the other partners before closing the deal. Parsons and brennan and Hamilton are resisting the collec- tion of the note on the ground that they were not parties to the trans action.
 The hearing of the case was con cluded on Saturday afternoon, 1t getting into the hands of the jury at o'clock. At g o'clock verdict was returned in favor of the plain tiffs, dire cting that the defendants pay the sum of $2,350, without in-