Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 39, Number 91, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 19 July 1907 — END OF MILROY TRUSTEE CASES [ARTICLE]

END OF MILROY TRUSTEE CASES

The two law suits in the circuit court growing out of the township trusteeship of Milroy townsnip, came to a fi ual end Tuesday evening. It will be remembered that Trustee W. C. Huston sold his farm and went to Perrysburg, Miami county early last spring, to run a store. He secured a room for an office and advertised to come back every so often to take care of the business of the office. A large number of the voters of the township petitioned Auditor Leatherman to appoint another man for trustee, holding that Mr. Huston was no longer a resident of the township. This Mr. Leatherman did, appointing G. L. Parks. Mr. Huston is a Democrat and Parks a Republican, and before the change the Democrats had a majority of one in the board of township trustees and after the change the Republicans had a majority. Each party really needed the majority in their business, for the political complexion of the next county uperintendent depended thereon. On 'the advice and backing of certain leading members of his party, Mr. Hnston brought suit in the circuit court to oust Mr. Parks. The case was tried at the April term and resulted in a disagreement, which had the effect of leaving Mr. Parks still in possession of the office. From a legal point of view it looked very much as tho Mr. Parks had far the best case, and ten of the jury were for him and only two for Huston. In the meantime Mr. Huston still retained a considerable sum of the township money in his care and Mr. Parka brought suit to compel him to turn it over two lim. Thus the two trial in the September term of court. In June, by law required, the board of trustees met and elected Mr. Lamson, a Republican as county superintendent. Mr. Parks acted as trustee from Milroy and Mr. Huston was not present. Thus the matter rested until this weeks when Mr. Hunton came over from Miami county, and after twe days of negotiations, both the cases above mentioned weie dismissed by the respective plaintiffs. The costs in Mr. Huston’s cage, which as stated was tried once, amount to about SIOO, and that in Mr. Parks’ case to about sll. Mr. Huston agrees pay the costs in both cases, but it is a matter of common knowledge that tho political backe.s in his suit lor the office have verbably agreed to sta id for these costs. Mr. Huston still had some S7OO or 8800 of .township money which he turns over to Mr. Parks. Had Mr. Huston let this case gone to trial and Jost, as he almost certainly would, he would have had to pay not only the costs of the trial, but also a ten per cent penalty on all the money he was holding, from which it will be seen that he is really a large financial gainer by the dismissal of the suit, even if he does have a small bill of costs to pay.