Jasper County Democrat, Volume 8, Number 1, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 8 April 1905 — COURT HOUSE NEWS. [ARTICLE]

COURT HOUSE NEWS.

Items of Interest Gathered In the Offlees of the County Capitol. There were but $179.75 of unloaded school funds on hand April 1. —o — Monday, May 1, is the last day for paying the spring installment of taxes to avoid the penalty. —o — The county board of education is called to meet here next Monday to procure enumeration blanks. —o — Remember, that to avail yourself of the mortgage exemption law, yon must file your application this month. —o — Ten marriage licenses were issued last month against four for the month previous and six for March, 1904. Recorder Tilton has rented the Mrs. Roberts residence property on South Division street and wiil move his family here from Wheatfield some time this month. Jasper county’s allottment of the acts of the last general assembly were received Monday and are being given out by the clerk to those entitled to copies of them. —o — Marriage license issued: April 1, John P. Swisher to Sarah Elizabeth Gorbet. April 3, Frank Morrow to Dora E. Jordan. —o — J. C. Wiugate, member of the state board of tax. commissioners, met with the county and township assessors here Wednesday to discuss their work and assist in arriving at a uniform rate of assessment lor improvements throughout the state. The case of L. T. Hammond vs. Fitz W. Bedford, wherein the former sued the latter for SSOO damages for forfeiture of contract in the sale of the lease of the property on South Van Rensselaer street, occupied by the Keister restaurant, was tried in the Newton circuit court last week and resulted in favor of defendant Bedford. The case was first tried here, resulting in a disagreement of jury, when plaintiff took a change of venue to Newton county. ' Not much of importance was done at the meeting of the county commissioners this week, except the allowance of claims, and the work of the session was closed Tuesday afternoon. Following is a report of the proceedings: The bond of H. H. Stewart & Co., the Hanging Grove township gravel road contractors, was approved, and bonds for the construction of the road were ordered issued. Chas. A. Gundy was granted* a retail liquor license for Fair Oaks to date from Agril 5,1905, R. W. Marshall was re-em-ployed county attorney at a salary of *4OO per year. The Union township secession case was continued to the next term. New suits filed: No. 6t 18. James H. Chapman, trustee or he firm of A. MoCoy and Co., bis »k----rupts, vs. Delos Thbmpaon 1 nd William A. Rinehart; on notes, etc. This action is brought to ret av-

er the amount owing the McCoy bank by the Rensselaer Stock Farm, which was conducted as a partnership affair by Delos Thompson. T. J. McCoy and the latter’s brother-in-law, W. A. Rinehart The books of said A. McCoy & Co., showed that the Rensselaer stock farm was indebted to said bank on overdraft at the time of the failure, $25,556.65; that in 1893. the said Stock Farm executed three notes to said bank for the sums of $2,040.80, $5,937,12 and $5,849.80, respectively, which had been carried on the books as assets up to the time of the failure, but which the trustee alleges he has been unable to find in the papers of the bank. The total face value of these three notes is $13,827.72, and the interest from date to the present time is nearly as much more, so that the total figures of all the Stock Farm indebtedness to the bank is about $50,000. This being a partnership concern, each individual partner is liable for the debts of the firm, and Thompson is financially good for any judgment that may be secured against him, whether the other defendant is or not. We understand that Thompson claims to have paid his share of the indebtedness of the firm and to have gotten a receipt in full from T. J. McCoy for same. (The Demoorat is also informed by a party who claims to have seen the missing notes that are in Thompson’s possession and are endorsed by T. J. McCoy as paid.) Tom stated in his examination Monday that Thompson had paid $2,000 in January, 1904, and that he had credited the Stock Farm account with same, and the books so show, that he gave Thompson a receipt for this $2,000 o¥ that He signed a receipt, rather, Thompson having written out same for him to sign. Tom’s evidence was to the effect that he intended and supposed that the $2,000 was simply a payment on the account and was not a discharge of the debt. It is possible that if this matter comes to trial some interesting matters may be brought out. No. 6849. Emsing-Gagen Co., vs. Isaac Senesac; action on account; demand $257.82.