The Sentinel=record., 1914-01-18

be in the supposition that man who circulated a petition was called. The witness could testify that a name had been signed and that the person was white, but :he age question would be raised. The witness could testify he believed the person in question 10 be of age, probably from hearsay, but that would be objected to, and there fore nothing could be proved as a tnality unless every petitioner were brought into court.
 There are something more than HOO names on this petition" said Judge Mooney. q do not believe the law contemplated that every signer of this petition should be brought into court l will rule that the petitions as presented are prima facie, as stat ed, and the remonstrants will have the right to offer evidence in contra dictiOn.'
 The hour was late then, and the question was raised as to when The matter would be continued in court. Some of the attorneys favored a night session, while others favored the mat ter going over until Monday.
 q am tired and not feeling very well, and will adjourn court un-il Mon day morning at 10 o'clock" said Judge Mooney
 Clifford Bell was again the witness on the stand when the morning ses- sion was opened, and he requested to make a statement. in which he set himself right that he had not intend ed to testify that he had told every signer all the provisions of the pe;i- tion.
 He was pressed hard to tell wheth. CT or not he had told various sign CTS, whose names Attorney McCon- nell gave with the questions, that the petition circulated was one against wine rooms and the sale of liquors 10 minors. He could not remember Judge Mooney aided the attorney in an endeavor 70 get definite answers to many of the questions along this line, but the epdeavor failed. T don't remember" was the usual an swer.
 The witness testified that there had been a regulation clause that he had carried in his hand, but he did not testify it was attached to any of the petitions. He testified that this clause set forth that there would be no liq uor sold to minors that there would ha xuvipn dow violations of the law.
 On one of the petitions he had cir culated was a pencil notation. La dies" which the witness was ques- tioned closely about, as 70 it's signifi | canoe, but he did not remember how | it came there unless he had merely ! scribbled it there meaningless.
 Mir. Mcconnell claimed that the printed list referred to was an evi | dence of a fraud perpetrated on the | signers, and The petitioners offered | to bring it into evidence, which was | done.
 Witness Bell was then taken up along a line of impeachment. "I don't ! was about all the answer that could be secured to many ques tions put to him.
 Attorney Sawyer stated that the were trying evidently to prove fraud in the petitions, yet had failed to charge that in their pleadings, and he thought the pro- ceeding was irregular, bu. Judge kaf ], fIaN ter came out on cross-eXamination, it was proper.
 The witness was questioned close ly as to whether or not he had urged some of the signers to put their names to the petitions merely because he "got 10 cents for each name" He did not remember He could not say definitely whether he had done so CT not
 Did you get 10 cents for each name?" the court asked.
 Bell admitted that he had received that pay.
 Attorney Mcconnell then asked if | he did not tell some signers, who were not inhabitants, to sign the pc tition so he would get 10 cents per name. He did not remember The l court here admonished the witness to try to remember; that he was not answering the questions satisfactory ilY and that if he had made such statements to signers on the peti- tions he should remember that incl dent.
 No further progress being made along this score, the witness was ex- cused at 10:30 o'clock.
 The question was raised as 10 there was being made a writ ten record of the case. Attorneys Da- vies, Sawyer and Wilmington for the petitioners contended that there was no record of the case, since on an ap- peal, if there were one, it would all | have to be tried de nova, or as if it had never been tried before.
 Attorneys Sumpter and Mcconnell urged that the record their stenog- rapher was taking was proper, and | that if it was necessary they would |