Jasper County Democrat, Volume 8, Number 34, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 25 November 1905 — THE COURT HOUSE [ARTICLE]

THE COURT HOUSE

Items Picked Up About The County Capitol. The White circuit court wilf convene at Monticello Monday; It is expected that some of the McCoy criminal cases will be tried at this term. —o — Marriage licenses issued: Nov: 18, Solomon L. Allen, of Tefft, aged 21. to Amelia T. Schreiber, alse of Tefft, aged 24. First marriage for each. —o— New suits filed: No. 6871. The Wardner, Bushnell & GlessnerCo., vs. John S. Lakin; complaint and confession of judgment. —o — Geo. E. Hershman has formed a partnership with W. F. Hodges of Hiseville, Ky., and the new firm will occupy quarters in Murray’s new building for the practice of law. —o — The annual session of the Jasper County Farmers’ Institutewill be held here next week, be-i ginning Monday, Nov. 27, and continuing through the week ex-* cept Thursday. On Tuesday Gov. z Hanly will speak at the M. E.” church, at 2 p. m. Program in full appears elsewhere in The Democrat. —o— Court has been grinding all week, but outside the Guy cases and the Kight case little of importance has been done, those cases monopolizing the time and the latter being still on at the time of going to press. Following is a report of the more important proceedings of the term to date: William B. Austin vs, Edward J. Steinke; dismissed on plaintiff’s motion. Jesse J. Fry vs. William M. Shafforet al; defendant ordered to file amended complaint on or before Nov. 27.

Mary E. Spitler vs. Lucas Lumpp et al; dismissed by plaintiff, costs taxed to defendants. John W. Berk et al vs. Mary E. Spitler; dismissed on defendant’s motion and costs taxed to plaintiff. Frank B. Vennum vs. Frank B. Howe; dismissed at plaintiff’s cost. James H. Chapman trustee, vs. Delos Thompson et al; plaintiff granted leave to amend his complaint, and alias process ordered issued for defendant William A. Rinehart, to sheriff of Jasper county, returned Dec. 4,1905. C. M. Horner vs. Rufus Orcutt et al; dismissed on plaintiff’s motion at his costs. F. D. Callan vs. James C. McColly and William Warne; dismissed at plaintiff’s cost. Ed Oliver vs. Charles F. Lyons; dismissed at plaintiff’s cost. D A. Landers vs. DuluthIndiana Oil & Asphalt Co.; dismissed, costs paid. James P. Clark vs. Rial P. Benjamin et al; judgment for $434.82 and mortgage foreclosed. William B. Austin vs. Hugh Brosnan et al; dismissed as to Lafayette Trust Co.; judgment vs. Brosnan for $176,57 and mortgage foreclosed. Anna R. Mills et al, vs. Martin L. Hemphill; set for Dec. 6, 9 a. m. William B. Austin vs. John and Jacob A. Karr; judgment for $126.14 and chattel mortgage foreclosed. Thomas H. Barber vs. Ella M. Stoudt et al; dismissed at plaintiff’s cost. Warder, Bushnell & Glessner Co., vs. John 8. Lakin; judgment for *9l. State vs. Jasper Guy; change of venue asked for from the court by plaintiff, and Ralph W. Marshall appointed special judge to hear case. Jury verdict of assault and battery, and defendant fined SBOO. In the Guy divorce case from Remington, by agreement, we are informed, Mrs. Guy was given the divorce on her cross-complaint and pays all the costs. All the other cases against her have been dismissed. The case of Stewart & Son vs. W. L. Lewis, engineer of the first Iroquois ditch sale, to recover the 12,500 forfeit put up by the for-

mer to make good their bid, was settled, Lewis returning the money and paying them $12.50 interest and the Stewarts paying the costs. William B. Austin vs. R. A., and Abel Hasper; judgment for $300.27; costs taxed to plaintiff in attachment proceedings. William B. Austin vs. same parties; judgment for $296.94, judgment against plaintiff for attachment costs. James H. Chapman, trustee, vs. Mattie M. Rinehart et al; A. T. Bowen & Co., cross-plaintiffs, ask for change of venue and case is .sent to White county. County of Newton vs. Christian L. Brandt and Frank W. Templeton; case settled by agreement, defendants pay $1,301.32, This is the case where the county through mistake had overpaid contractors some SI,BOO on a gravel road in one of the north townships. The attorneys went over the figures Thursday evening and agreed on judgment being entered for above sum. The Kight vs. Kight case from Roselawn was taken up Thursday and a host of Roselawn people were here as witnesses. The principal attorneys in this case are Judge Reynolds and E. B. Sellers lof Monticello. The title of the case is Ella Kight vs. Wm, Kight, Lucinda Kight, his wife, and Samuel Kight, suit for $20,000 damages for allienation of the affections of William Kight, plainstiff’s husband, and thereby causing him to leave her, as alleged. The principal parties were married at Joliet, 111., Nov. 4, 1902, and lived together until April 15, 1905. Wm T. Kight and Samuel Kight are uncles of plaintiff’s husband, who was a widower at the time of the marriage to plaintiff and had two children, now aged 15 and 13 years, respectively, and which plaintiff has had the care and custody of for the past eleven years. The case was still going, on yesterday. It came here from Newton county on change of venue granted plaintiff, and the costs following from there were nearly $l5O.