The Hartford republican. (Hartford, Ky.) 18??-1926, 1921-09-16
CIRCUIT COURT TERM
BEGINS NEXT MONDAY
Good Sized Civil Docket And Number
OF Criminal Prosecutions
Are Set for Hearing.

set for nearing and a number OF
criminal prosecutions have been
made special for the term.
Criminal prosecutions set for trial
the 9TH day Of the term are:
Comth. VS.. Clarence Aull, Injur-
ing property; Comth. VS.. same, de-
sorting infant child; Comth. VS.. Roy
Hines, s cases, Selling liquor; Comth.
VS.. Walden Baize, two cases. Selling
Squor; Comth. VS.. Lewis Carmickle,
two cases. Selling liquor; Comth. VS..
Thomas Taught, Operating distillery
Comth. VS.. Roy Ensor, Selling liquor.
Petit Jurors.
Martin Porter. G.. NJ. Burdette,
Lonnie Cook, Ernest Morris, Frank
Maple, Sam Davidson, Jeff Curtis, T.
E. Cooper, Dudley Plummer. Sher-
man Coleman, Luther Lilies, ]. G..
Davis, r. f. Eudaley. f. r. Williams,
John A. Raymond. w. p. Midkiff, w.
A. Lloyd, James c. Bennett, Sr., d. J.
Sheldon, Dyer Davis, Joe S. Bennett,
James II. Robertson, w. p. Brown,
Ernie Curtis, Presley Brown, A. c.
Acton, l.. c. Hoover, Jr., VIM. Lake,
J. j. Keown, Charles Smith, Will
Neal, ]. B. Tappan. John F. Coleman,
Thad Barnard, Ebert Garden, Birdie
Hammond.
New Suits Filed.
w. E. Hicks, administrator of the
estate of Hildred Hicks, deceased, VS..
Loyal Protective Association. on a
claim of $500 alleged to be due es-
tate of deceased on a sick policy.
Louana and Wilma Rowan and
Locke Brown VS.. the Beaver Dam
coal company, to recover $1,000
claimed to be due on account of the
defendant. company dumping slack
and draining copperas water on land
of plaintiff with resulting damage to
the amount sued for.
Thomas Vance VS.. James Cummins,
on a claim for $500 growing out Of
a land deal. Plaintiff alleges that
after buying a farm from the defen-
dant for which he paid $420 Herman
Black and Sam Hoover laid claim to
the land, and recovered it by suit.
Plaintiff sues for price paid for land
and costs incurred in defending title
in suit,
Lizzi Barnett VS.. Omar Barnett, di-
vorce. Couple separated in June of
last year. Plaintiff charges abandon
ment. The defendant is now in Ohio
Naomi Vincent Wilson VS.. Charles
Wilson, divorce. Couple was married
in Chicago in January 1920 and sep
arated in July 1921. Abandonment
is the ground for action. Plaintiff
says in her petition that the defend
ant earns $500 month, and she asks
for 500 a month for support while
suit is pending and $4,000 alimony.
c. f. Royal and others VS.. P. F..
Westerfiald and others. a suit for or
der of division of 240 acres of land,
the property OF the late w w. (Hick-
DRY BID Royal.
Ruth NJ. Pryor VS.. George Pryor,
divorce. Petitioner states defendant
beat and bruised her in such manner
that she could no longer live with
him, and p-ays the court to grant her
an order of divorce, the custoday of.
her child, suitable allowance for sup
port until cause is heard and final
sum of $500 alimony. The couple
was married in Grayson county in
1917 and separated in June Of the
present year,
r.. A. Bridges VS.. w. S. Brown,
Hardin Brown, Judson Brown and
Otis Brown, on claim for $4,000 dam
ages, alleged TO be due on account
of the defendants refusing to allow
the plaintiff to operate coal mine
lease on the lands owned by parties
named.
Maud Austin VS.. James Austin, di-
vorce. Plaintiff sues on ground of
abandonment. The couple was mar
ried in 1906 and separated in 1919.
T. II. Balmain VS.. Lucinda Bal
main, divorce. Abandonment charg-
ed. Couple married in 1898 and
separated in August 1920.
Pearl Snodgrass VS.. Jesse Snod-
grass, divorce. Plaintiff charges
abandonment. She also asks judg-
ment for $500 which she alleges she
had when married and which she
gave to her husband during their mar
ried life
John S. Daugherty VS.. Mary j.
divorce. Plaintiff says
he and defendant were married June
23. 1920. and that defendant aban-