St. Tammany farmer. [volume] (Covington, La.) 1874-current, 1912-12-14
COURT
PROCEEDINGS
THIS WEEK
Judge Lancaster and Dist.
Attorney Vol Brock
Enter Upon Their Duties in
New Official Capacity.
Grand Jury Brings in But
Four True Bills.
Town of Abita Loses Case
In Matter Of Lights.

Court opened Monday with Judge
Joseph B. Lancaster on the bench
and District Attorney J. Vol Brock
prosecuting. The docket was not z
heavy Que and there were few crimi-
nal cases, but the proceedings had
more than passing interest from the
fact that this was the first sitting OF
the newly elected Judge, and also
the first appearance in his official
capacity of the new district attorney
The retiring judge, Thos. NJ. Burns.
had presided in the court since Oc-
tOber, 1903, when he entered upon
the unexpired term CT Judge Jas. M.
Thompson, whose death left the
bench vacant. He declined to be-
come 4 candidate for reelection and
Hon. Jos. B. Lancaster was elected
40 his successor, receiving a highly
complimentary vote from the people
OF the district. The court room was
more than usually crowded on this
occasion of his first sitting.
Judge Lancaster in his charge tt
the Erand jury called their attention
to the oath that bound them to &
performance of their duties, and in
reference t. matters regarding the
S0IuSaVy CONOAtAVu VI VAC J0AA IA "hASAA
prisoners we're confined, cautioned
HlsAs lBql auB3IodmI svM Z! leql uaql
cure should be taken of the prisoners
ETA til anu Gcn.iort. within reason.
That it was tie duty Of the police
jury to make provision fer the main
tenance of proper conditions and that
It was the duty CT the ury to investi-
gate any charges as to an unsani-
tary state of affairs. The State
Board Of Health had the power to
make sanitary rules and to inspect
jails and enforce those rules, and
within the scope of their power might
ct any time be expected to make In
vestigation into the sanitary condi-
ton here.
that there should be a systematic
numbering of cases before the jury.
20 that they would rotate in an order
that would enable witnesses to know
when they would be called upon to
testify and not be gobliged to linger
about the courthouse for several days
waiting to be called. He had noticed
women with babes in their arms so
waiting, and he believed this was
hardship that might be overcome BY
q proper preparing and numbering
OF the cases, to be taken up in order.
He also spoke of the frequency
with which charges were brought be-
fore the jury that had little founda-
ton in fact, and that were sometimes
the result of personal spite or politi-
cal grudge. True bills in such cases
entailed considerable cxpcase uptl
tile parish without the possibility Of
conviction, and such cases, as vel!
as cssesi in which the evidence is
entirely Insufficient to convict on tG "a
in court, should be thrown out.
Also that cases in which no II ut
bill is found should be so numberef
and disposed OF that they will not
remain oyer to the next grand II y
with the probability of again b. ~
taken up. 1T should be SO arrangeG
In such caseS that the bondsmen will
know that they are discharged and
no longer liable
Following is the business transact
ed this week:
Louisa Rogers vs. VIM. Rogers,
dismissed at plaintiffs cost.
Mercantile Lumber and Supply Co
VS.. Jones & Pickett Co.. Ltd, suit
W UC Ldhcu up III pINoIC SAonAOSas
within 10 days.
l.. J. Heintz VS.. John Coltora. dis
missed at plaintiffs cost.
Mrs. Nora Fendlason ct al VS.. Smc-
line Rogers ct al, dismissed at plain
tiff's cost.
Edmund Rizner VS.. Town of Abita
Springs, Judgment for plaintiff
against town of Abita Springs but
rejecting plaintiffs demand cn a.
Multi and 40. Pons. Z
This was case in which the town
of Abita had contracted for lights
for the town, but which4theysclaiilsed
did not come ups to thes. .eficiencs
claimed for them. 1t seems that tho
notes were, signed by Alexander Mutt
mayor, and A. O. Pons, secretary,
but that it was not meant that they
should be individually responsible for
the debt. According to the Judgment
they are relieved of personal responsi. !
bility, but the town is held liable 81
John PeraldO VS.. Chas r. Bon
well, preliminary judgment.
Newman & Wilcox VS.. a. d. Piag-
gio. preliminary Judgment
]. w. Hartman ct al VS.. T. 4.
Brewster, sheriff, ct al. preliminary
judgment.
w. NJ. Polk VS.. j. A. Harper, under
advisement.
FL. Heintz vs.. r. D.Thcmas: i,,ag-
ment as prayed for
Louis Jenkins VS.. Johnson Lumtel
(COntinued on mage A.