Baraboo weekly news. [volume] (Baraboo, Wis.) 1912-197?, 1923-09-27
Reedsburg Business Man Claimed
Company Failed to Garry Out
Its Agreement as to Cuts
JURY DECIDES FOR THE
DEFENDANT In THE CASE
Resident of South Part Of County
In Court In Connection With
Packing Company Case
(from Fridays daily

from FRIDAY uallyJ
In the case Of the Unique Illus
trating Co., against Arthur G. Hide
brandt the jury decided that the
plaintiffs agent stated to the defen
dant prior to the signing Of the con
tract in question that the contract
was not to become effective until the
defendant had further opportunity to
look over and select the cuts. Not
all twelve but ten or more agreed to
the verdict-favor OF the defendant
Mr.. Hilderandt resides in Reeds
burg and claims when he signed the
contract for the advertising cuts he
was to have an opportunity later to
look it over. The representative fol-
the company did not call again and
in the meantime Mr.. Hildebrandt
found in addition to the cost of the
cuts, $4,000, that the price for the
space in the newspapers made a
total greater than he cared to pay
The company sued for $78, the actual
cost OF the cuts plus the commission
The witnesses:I Arthur G. Hflle-
brandt and George MCGEE. A deposi
ton from Edward H Fritz was also
read:
The Jury; John IDonahua p. T.
Darlington, r. M. Bickie; Myrtle
Giese, H. C. Schluter, Herb Bryant
Mrs. VIM. Voss, Fred Wheeler, Her
man Dorow, Ed Fredericks, John
zimmerman and Mrs. John Verthein.
Echo of Packing Company
Art Waffenschmidt was brought
into court to answer questions con
corning his property. Some time age
a packing company was organized a.
Sank City and the digging of hole
i'm the ground was as far as the com
pany ventured Those who subscribed
for stock have been asked to pay
the expenses incurred and some
have paid but some have not. Waffen
schmidt had refused to pay, in fact
had refused to come into court II
the matter and Sheriff Ode brought
him. In court the question of con
tempt was adjusted without his pay
ing a fine or receiving sentence upor
his agreement to answer questions
as to his property. He stated thai
his brother ad himself were working
the home farm near Prairie du Sac
that they had given note to then
father for the personal property
that only part of the note had been
paid. that he had no bonds and
a few dollars in cash, and that the
automobile in the family had beer
given to his wife by her brother
The attorney for the plaintiffs asked
that a receiver be appointed that the
claim, $3.50 be collected. Judge
Crosby hesitated to tie up the prop
erty with a receivership and told the
attorney another procedure he nigh
take in order to collect the amount
The court advised Mr.. Waffenschmid
to pay the claim as that would bt
the easiest way out Of the trouble
The defendant had no doubt made {
mistake in signing but that did no.
relieve him from the obligation. Al
though he had received no value tht
law was the claim should be paid
the court said, and told Mr. Waffen
schmidt the plaintiffs could give hin
all kinds of trouble if he did no
pay. The advice of the court was t.
and get from under the assessment
Judge Crosby also stated he hat
no interest in the matter but wa
only stating the law in such cases
He also said the attorneys were on!
performing their duty and 20 refus
in such cases made matters all tn
worse.
The court decided that Mr. Wafer
schmidt pay the expenses Of III
sheriff and other sests, the last tel
rot to exceed ten dollars, or spen
four days with Sehriff Ode.
Plain Case
In the case Of the Plain State ban
Continued on Page TwCl