Baraboo weekly news. [volume] (Baraboo, Wis.) 1912-197?, 1915-09-23
CASES HEARD IN
CIRCUIT COURT

/ Clarence St. Claire is a very young
man and when he appeared in court was
well dressed. The jury found him gull
ty of burglary at La Vale and the
court sentenced him to three years at
Green Bay. According to what came
out in court he stole from persons at
La Vale and even went back the Sec
ond time. To add to the unpleasantness
of the situation he carried a revolver
and when the time came to sentence
him, District Attorney Hill said that
Attorney j. w. Frenz had word to
say in behalf of the defendant. Mr..
Frenz stated that it was the young
mans first offense and asked to have
him paroled but the court replied the
nature of the crime was such that
punishment should be meted out. Judge
O Neil closed by advising st. Claire to
be good man and possibly the board
of control would parole him before the
three years expired.
The witnesses: Carl Coens, Belle Ra-
bein, Emil Rabein, Clarence St. Claire,
Henry Byrne.
The jury:John Chaffe, Dwight Welch,
Albert Powell, M H. Mercer, P. H.
Sansum, Henry Haley, Arthur Smith.
Perry Heinman, VIM. He ad, Charles
Marsh, Aug. Lehman and c.. Z.
| Newell
The Newell Case.
The case of Fremont Newell
attracted considerable attention and
the jury wrested with the proposition
several hours before reaching verdict.
Newell was charged with assault, the
leading witness being Mrs. E. II. Bar
ker. When Newell was asked if he
had anything to say told the Judge that
he was innocent. He said that he was
born and raised in the town ofFairfield
had resided in Sauk County except
two years, was divorced from his wife,
had four children had been employed
on the same farm for seven seasons,
had never taken anything stronger
than beer and that he had saved no
money. He had separated from his
wife about four years ago, he said.
The court said if he were guilty the
sentence should be severe. He then
sentenced Newell to four months in
the Sauk County Jail.
The witnesses:Mrs. E. H. Barker,
Willis Creaviston, Grace Barker, E. Ell
Barker, Fremont Newell, Ed Donahue,
James Brennan, ]. R. Hofstatter.
The Jury Claude Richard son, Richard
Premo, Charles Smith H. Anderson,
H. c. Rick, Geo Butterfeld, j. o. Wagner,
j. C. Meyer, Arthur Ochsner, Charles
Rote, Orin Schluter, Fred Magl.
Case Dismissed
The case of August Mallon vs. Au-
gust Tom was dismissed. The plaintiff
and defendant reside in the town OF
Honey Creek and there had been some
talk about the plaintiff killing deer.
Mr.. Mallon laid the complaint at the
door of Mr. Tom and sued for slander,
claiming he shot rabbits and not deer.
About twenty witnesses were present
and the jury had been drawn when the
complaint was punctured by Lieuten-
ant Governor E. F. Dithmar.
1t was found that although shooting
was mentioned, the complaint failed to
state where the alleged killing had
been committed in Sauk county or
elsewhere. The killing of deer Of
some of the northern counties of the
state is perfectly legitimate during a
certain time of the year. Although
Sauk county is closed county, there
b eing nothing to show the supposed
killing took place here, the court dis
missed the case.
The case of Richard Mielke vs. Aug
ust Tom is also on the calendar and is
similar to the above. These two eases
have been the talk around the Honey
Creek fresides for several moons and it
was quite surprise to those gathered
in the court room to see it fade away
SO readily.
Judgment Of foreclosure was grant
ed n the case of Daniel Ruggles vs
Frank Feltz.
The case of M. M. Johannsen va f.
A. Barnard was placed on the calendar.
H. J. Bohn was appointed referee to
take to testimony in the case of the
Studebaker Corporation vs. Arthur S.
Lanich.
The case of Fred Broadbent. vs w.
Fl. Hutter was taken from the calendar.
A judgment of force Osure was
granted in the case of Mary Crosby vs
unnru A Kr1kor