Evening Republican, Volume 22, Number 134, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 7 June 1919 — BRINGS SUIT FOR $50,000 [ARTICLE]

BRINGS SUIT FOR $50,000

J. W. STOCKTON IN COUNTERACTION AGAINST D. S. MAKEEVER. Once again will the wheels of justice start grinding in the Jasper-New-ton circuit court in another legal battle between two of the most prominent citizens of the county—J. W. Stockton, proprietor of the Makeever hotel and large land owner, and D. S. Miakeever, county commissioner and wealthy farmer, when court convenes at the September term—the outgrowth of the trouble and ill-feeling existing between the two parties since the year 1916. Through his attorneys, J. W. Stockton on Friday filed a counteraction against Mr. Makeever, asking damages of the defendant to the extent of $50,000, Which sum, according to the plaintiff, is demanded as reparation for his injured reputation and financial loss. A brief resume of the trouble between Stockton and Makeever, and Which the suit just filed is the re-

sult, follows: At the solicitation of Mr. Stockton, the state board of accounts accountants to Rensselaer in Febzniary, 1916, to investigate charges against Makeever and Jesse Nichols, the Vatter being the superintendent of tref county farm in 1915, who were charged with having hauled corp from the county farm to the Makeever farm, and of not paying the county for same. Following the investigation, the accountants exonerated Makeever and Nichols. , r At the April term of the grp-nd jury, in the same year, Stockton Ernest Morlan were indicted, z the jury finding that they had perjured themselves in their statements to- the accountants about Makeever ' and Nichols. /

The trials of Stockton and Morlan were set for the September te’rm of court in 1916, Morlan being/'found guilty and given a fine of SKOO and costs, and a suspended sentience of from two to twenty-one years in the state penitentiary. Stockton’s (trial was continued until the spring term of court in 1917. The was venued to White county, late r being venued back to Jasper coupty upon motion of the plaintiff. 'Afterward the prosecution was ven’ued to Newton county, where oni the 14th day of June, 1917,,‘‘rihe defendant was acquitted the charges made against him. / ’ Stcjckton’s present action is the results of his acquittal in the Newton circuit court, and he seeks to show ‘chat Makeever’s action was uncalled for and that he has since found it to be a source of great injury to him.

The complaint, as filed Friday by Stockton, reads as follows: The plaintiff complains of the defendant, and says: That on the 29th day of April, 1916, the said defendant, falsely and maliciously, and without probable cause, procured the plaintiff to be indicted by the grand jury of the county of Jasper, state of Indiana, for the crime of perjury. That by reason thereof, the plaintiff was arrested and was compelled to give bail to avoid being confined in the county Jail, and the defendant caused said indictment to be prosecuted, and the venue of the case was changed to the White circuit court, where, upon the motion of the plaintiff, said indictment was quashed, and the plaintiff was by the

White circuit court held under bond to appear and "plead further prosecution in the Jasper circuit court for said offense. , . » That afterward, on the 12th day of February, 1917, the defandant falsely and maliciously, and without probable cause procured an affidavit to be filed against the plaintiff in the Jasper circuit court charging the plaintiff with having committed the crime of perjury in said county, by reason given whereof plaintiff was re-arrested and compelled to give further bail to procure his release from confinement in the Jasper county jail- . J _. That afterward, said prosecution was venued to the Newton circuit court, where the defendant caused the same to be prosecuted, and at the trial thereof in said Newton circuit court the plaintiff was, on the 14th day of June, 1917, acquitted of said charge and discharged, and said prosecution was terminated. By reason whereof the plaintiff has been greatly injured in his reputation and credit, and was compelled to and did pay out a large sum of money, to-wit: $5,000 for attorneys fees, hotel bills, traveling expenses, the takipg 6f depositions of witnesses and other necessary expenses, all of which expenditure was ecessary for the proper preparation and presentation of plaintiff’s defense in said prosecution. , , Whereby, plaintiff was damaged in I the sum of fifty thousand (150,000) I dollars, for which he demands judgment. W. W. Lowrey, A, Halleck, Attorneys for Plaintiff No doubt the trial will be bitterly contested, as have the former ones, ' and the general puHic will watch ; with much interest the entire pro-

ceedings when the case is over Ho the court. Both Mr. Stockton and Mr. Makeever _* re inenof wealth and prommencein tins community .nd e»eh b« by a great army of legal taiem.