Baraboo weekly news. [volume] (Baraboo, Wis.) 1912-197?, 1921-04-14
SAUK PRAIRIE
FARM Law SUIT
c. c. Steuber Place Sells for $25,-
600 and New Owner Decides
the Price Is Too Much

c.. c.. Steuber for the purchase OF the
Prairie View farm, about two miles
northwest of the village Of Prairie
du Sac. The farm consists of 32O
acres on Sauk Prairie and 20 acres, a
wood lot on the Baraboo bluff. Mr..
Hutter made early payments in all
$500 besides the personal property,
but later decided he had paid too
much for the place and when crowd
ed for additional amounts refused to
pay. When an action was begun he
opposed the procedure, bringing the
case into court.
Mr.. Hutter had visited the farm
before moving there and Mr.. Steuber
has been at his place at Plain. The
Hutter family moved to the Prairie
View farm just before Thanksgiving
and soon after snow fell. Hutter claim
ed he did not have an opportunity to
examine the soil before he signed the
contract.
Mr.. Hutter had had no experience
with sandy soils and made no inquir-
les AS to the valuation of the Steuber
farm prior signing the contract.
1t developed in the testimony that
he had been told by others he had
paid too much for the place. The land
is sandy and the testimony showed it
produced about Is bushels of oats
per acre and from 10 to Is bushels
of rye. AS to clover, it did not do
well
The conversation gone over be-
tween the former and present owner
were brought out in court and Mr..
Hutter received the impression the
land was like other acres on Sauk
Prairie. The tine Of the year he
went over the ground was not ad-
vantageOus to careful inspection.
H. E. Vogel testified he had resided
IN the neighborhood for twenty-eight
years but had never been on the farm.
He had passed it often. He did not
think Mr.. Hutter paid too much
F. S. Eberhardt a jeweler in Prairie
du Sac, had worked on the farm
many times, often to help his friend
Mr.. Steuber out. He though Mr. Steu-
ber got what it was worth.
In making their pleadings to the
jury the attorneys for Mr.. Hutter
claimed the contract called for only
300 acres of land, that 40 acres were
omitted from the contract. The
judge and attorneys went over the
matter and that is the way it seemed
to figure. The Jury took the contract
with them to the jury room.
Pictures Shown
Pictures taken on the farm were in
evidence. Some of them were as
follows:
Four machines cutting grain on the
farm.
Twenty-one stacks of grain cut in one
year.
Threshing scene.
Four loads of hay by the barn.
Three pIowing, twelve horses being
used.
The evidence came out the pictures
We're made twenty years ago and that
part Of the grain shown in the stacks
came from a Yankee street place.
The witnesses: Alois Hutter, J. IT.
Bates. Martin Accola, William Block,
Andrew Moeley, Mrs Anna Hutter,
William Meyer, Christian c. Steuber,
Chris Ploetz, William Schultz. M. A
Reynolds, H. E. Yogel, F. S. Eber-
hardt.
The jury: Archie Bonnie, Henry
Moeller, Albert Idhe, w v. Rich, Row
Turton, Perry Hineman. Ed. Guntbrop
Roy Gasser VIM. Toole, Jr Charles
Kruger, John Talbot, William John
son.
SPECIAL VERDICT
After being out nearly twelve hours
the jury disagreed on the special
verdict, the questions being as fol-
lows:
No. 1. Did Mr.. Steuber, for the pur-
pose of inducing Mr.. Hutter to pur-
chase the farm, represent to him that
he raised every year on the farm
from twenty to twenty-five bushels of
rye to the acre?
No. 2. If you answer question num-
Der one, Eyes" then was such repre-
sentation false?
No 8. If you answer question num-
Der one Eyes, then did Mr.. Hutter
believe such representation to be
true and rely thereon in making the
purchase of said farm?.
No. A. Did Mr.. Steuber, for the pur-
pose of inducing Mr.. Hutter to pur-
chase the farm, represent to him
that he raised on said farm from
forty to fifty bushels of oats to the
acre each year?
No. 5. If you answer question mum
Der four yes, then was such repre-
sentation false?
No 6 IF Won answer nuestion nuno