| Show Disch discharged arced thia this forenoon in the farat district t cou court rt the case of the people ac agil lUst thoe thos reed sen and wm vm t hull indicted for obstructing a public road was ca calad ll 11 d mr hilee hiles represented the prosecution and F R richarde Ric Rie hurde burds app appeared Pared for the defendants fend ants mr it richardi richards proffered to waive a jury and let the ca casie e b be e tried by the court as the question ques tiou involved was one of law in more ore tb than at of fact feet however the court preferred to em pannel a jury which was done and frank power fowers wa was 3 called and sworn as a witness for the prosecution counsel for the defense aked asked mr hike to elate state under what section of the statute tho the indictment wae was brought and mr air hiles answered that it wae was either u under 1 section or sec section tion 2166 of the compiled law laws or both mr richard richards objected to the introduction of testimony claiming that the indictment did not ot charge the commission of any public offense the prose cu tion relied upon sections and 2166 of the compiled laws the former section was repealed at the last session of the legislature and the other section wae was wholly inapplicable 1 to the case because it re ri ted only to cases where the highway had been maliciously dug up removed displaced broken or otherwise berwise injured or destroyed while this was a pro prosecution elution for placing a fence across the highway highway and could only be prosecuted prosecute under section 1 I page 28 laws of 1886 which reads read m ae follows foil owe sea 21 2 any person who ha has erected or maintains main tame or may hereafter erect and maintain a fence or other structure along and upon any portion of a public bidgway an and who after being duly notified by the he county curt to remove the same neglect or refuse to to do within in twenty daye or uch such further time not exceeding three months its may my be determined b by y such county court is i guilty of a misdemeanor 11 after some hesitation the prose cution reluctantly confessed that mr richards motion wa was well taken and the court sustained the objection mr richards asked that the jurt jury be instructed to ie le turn a verdict of not vat guilty in the case which wae was done and thu thus ended a vexatious case which it Is s generally conceded ought never to have been commenced ONE of our types lingers 11 beier inclined to enliven his residence by pome sweet ransle decided to purchase an n orean organ and for that purpose waited on mt esra eldredge A pratt and examined the large idock of orl bans to be seen in their tore store arg feeser L D edwards being present tabor orlian and reported in ite its favor for domestic use the fp p we was mad and further examination proyce that the professors judgment was vas not at fault the tone tons 1 11 good the thi touch brisa and the va vs riou rious stops inae 1 every call made upon them while the is molt most pl |
