Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1915-05-21
JUDGE WIlLETT RULES FOR El-
DER VALENTINE AND YVES
LEY MARTIN.
LAWSUIT is SUBMITTED
At NIGHT COURT SESSION
Court Rules That Evidence to Prove E.
e. Valentine and Wesley Martin
Up Hubbard Was Not Proved-WiII
Decide Remaining Issues Soon.

The case of Ross w. Hubbard vs.. R.
C. Valentine. ct al, was argued and
submitted to Judge Willett Thursday
night at an extra session held in order
; that the case might be finished before
| the day was over. Judge Willett an
| nounced that he might rule on 1t in a
few days, and at least before the end
of the term. He did rule on the law
suit insofar as it concerned Z E. Val
entine and Wesley Martin, of Webster
City.
He announced while the arguments
We're in progress that he had found
nothing in the case that would warrant
him in finding against these two de-
PENDANTS. When the arguments were
ended he practically decided the case
insofar as they are concerned by saying
no showing had been made to substan-
tiate the charge of conspiracy and
duress involving the elder Valentine
and his attorney. Martin.
The only question remaining in my
mind is as to the outcome of the con-
tention in this case between r. C. Val
entine and Hubbard said Judge Will
lett.
Court Asks Questions.
During the arguments Judge Willett
questioned the attorneys from time to
time for an Interpretation of certain
phases of the case. He asked z. \.
Farber for an explanation of the rea-
sons why Hubbard remained silent
about his alleged wrongs at the hands
of r. c. Valentine from August until
January before complaining or bring
ing suit to recover.
IT is not unreasonable 20 presume.
argued the lawyer in reply, that with
Valentine still in this community. with
these checks and vouchers in Nalen-
tines possession, with Hubbard, his
wife and their relatives all subject TO
the dire effects of the charges Nalen-
tine was making against Hubbard,
even if they were not true, that HUB
bard kept silent thru fear and did as
he did and told no one. not even his
wife until he confided in his lawyer.
Argued Oil Company lnsoIvent.
A great deal of the argument Of E.
" Farber and his associate counsel,
F. E Northup. was on the point that
the Consumers Oil Company was in
solvent when Hubbard bought Valen-
tines stock and ahd always been insol-
vent This contention was warmly de-
MED by testimony and argument Of
the defense.
Northup argued that Hubbard
bought losing and dying business
when he took Valentines stock off the
; latter's hands.
IT had been the policy Of young
the payment of his debts. His bust
ness had no stability II had no good
will. It had no going value, and unless
its agents went out and got business
no business came to it." Reading from
the report of the plaintiffs expert &C
countant. he said March 81 1913. the
company owed more than $4,000. How
can it be said this business was SOL
VENT"
| Cantonwine Case Quoted.
Another locally famous case Of alleged
| duress in which DR.. A. E. Cantonwine,
a former practicing physician of Van
| cleve was compelled to disgorge more
! than Sc. 900 to Bosch Bros, merchants
! of the place, was referred to in the
! argument of c. H. E. Boardnan, at
J torney for Valentine. This case was
! tried five or six years ago.
! Boardman argued that Hubbard hao
/ been caught misappropriatng money
! and THAI. Ike DR.. Cantonwine, he hao
| settled with the person he hac
/ wronged. and the court had held tina,
the settlement of Cantonwine an6
! Bosch Bros. was legal. II Canton
wine wanted to purchase immunity il
| that way.
Hubbard Diseredited."
This plaintiff stands here dis
credited by his own witnesses and the
record Of this case He Games here al
admitted elubeHZler to the extent o
s1,40o.
Had Hubbard wanted to be homes
| and square with r. G. Valentine, am
had wanted to draw those sums out o
the corporation, he would have draw
these checks payable to himself ant
not to banks The testimony shows
and / repeat it, that there are $l,4
worth of Hubbard checks in this cour
that never have been explained.
Hubbard was suffering from
case of over imitation of the noodle
That's proved by his automobile de
bauch with a party OF six for tw
weeks when he had balance OF onl
Sc; III one uanK ana an overdraIt
$40 in another" Boardman contin
ued sarcastically.
July 2, the day Hubbard left on nj
vacation, is the date OF one OF thes
checks for $3.50. That was the none
he took with him on the trip he con
tinued.
Charges Used Company Checks.
These checks left by Valentine fc
the payment OF pressing current bills
Boardman went on. Hubbard too
them to pay himself"
Arguing similarity OF the case 8
bar and the Cantonwine-Bosch car
in the light of the supreme courts ru
ing Boardman said: "R. c. Valentin
and Hubbard had a right to adju.
their differences in any way the
wanted to.
Hubbard knew that II he bougl
Valentines stock he would not hal
to pay the overdraft he had created
his personal account with the con
pany.
II have no doubt that, rather ths
have his wife relatives, and the pul
lie know the truth, Hubbard decided