domestic animal prohibited by law, from running at large, or prohibited by police regulation of any such district from running at large within the district at any of the times adopted by said vote, shall be liable for all damages done thereby while wrongfully remaining at large upon the public highway or upon the lands of another; which may be recovered by action of law; or the party injured may at his option distrain the trespassing animals and retain the same in some safe place at the expense of the owner until damages are paid," where a party elects to recover damages alleged to have been incurred by a violation of the foregoing provision, by acttion at law, he waives any lien that might have attached to the stock doing the injury, if he had proceeded to distrain the trespassing animals, so far as a prior encumbrancer by chattel mortgage was concerned. (Syllabus by the Court) EDITORIALS. We desired to publish many other matters in this issue of the Journal, but by reason of so many decisions of the Courts we have had to defer them. Chief Justice Kane, has granted the district court of Murry county an extension of time of its special terms in order to further advance the court work of that county Hon. Seymour Foose, one of the ablest and wellknown lawyers of Western Oklahoma, has had the struggles of Hercules to keep a number of the 'brethren' out of the penitentiary. Watonga has had a few stirring events since last summer. A few days ago a court at Nice settled a law suit that has been pending for 444 years. The total cost of this lawsuit amounts to nearly $150,000.00, while the value of the land in dispute is worth only about $2,000. The law papers which accumulated over pleadings, etc., were keted in 1,856 parcels, and weighed sixteen tons. "MOORE on Facts," continues to receive not only the fullest appreciation from the Profession, but the highest praise from the legal periodicals. The Michigan Law Review, one of the leading law journals in the English language, speaking of it in its last issue, says: "Few books published in recent years give evidence of more painstaking research not only in the field of legal literature but in other branches." Again speaking of the work, says: "There is a wealth of material so rich as to be appreciated only by extended examination." It gives us pleasure to read such remarks, as we a few months since wrote a review notice of these two volumes and know that it is entitled to all the eulogy that space will permit. Hon. D. M. Smith, state senator from Stephens county has written an extensive article for the Daily Leader on "Taxpayer's Burdens." Mr. Smith is one of the brightest men in the state, and when at his best can propel a very incisive pen. On December 6th 1909, before the United States Circuit of Appeals the great land suit of Eastern Oklahoma will be discussed, as appealed from the decision of Judge Ralph Campbell. On the decision of this Court and perhaps that of the Supreme Court of the United States will be determined questions of vital importance to the new State. From the goverment's brief now in the federal Circuit Court it is apparent that the rulings of Judge Campbell, are being viciously attacked. The purchasers, however are being represented by. as able counsel as ever assembled before any tribunal. Among them S. T. Bledsoe, who is an authority on Indian Land Titles. Whatever the out come of this pending case, it is eviIdent that before the Indian Land Titles can be set at rest Congress will have to pass an Act to quiet title to these lands, and in this very Act incorporate the procedure necessary to be followed. THE OKLAHOMA LAW JOURNAL VOL. 8. EDITED AND PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY D. H. FERNANDES, GUTHRIE, OKLAHOMA. December, 1909. No. 6. THE TREATMENT OF THE JURY. Hon. H. S. Wilcox, a celebrated trial lawyer and law writer speaking of the treatment that should be accorded to a jury, has said: "Each juror is a little tree with many tender branches and every branch acutely sensitive in some respect, and thus the twelve men on the jury become a wood, where he who moves about must take great care. It is not safe to talk on general matters or wander from the point in issue or comment on an alien subject lest you may hit some juror in a tender spot and make him turn against you. A man who throws stones into a crowd may wound a friend, and he who speaks against an institution or a general class, or by derision grills a witness for some defect in speech or manner may pinch a friendly juror and turn him to the other side. Threfore, the advocate should never wander or strike a blow not surely aimed to hit a certain mark; nor should he show his personal likes or hates or make exposure of his views on any subject where men may devide, lest he thereby cause some one on the jury who holds a contrary view may much dislike the exhibition and look with disfavor or contempt upon the person making it. Nor should the lawyer put himself in evidence in any other way. The case alone is what he has to try and certain questions only are submitted to the jury. What does not bear distinctly on these questions should be ignored, and all his strength and time be spent upon the issues. All men like approbation, and some, actual praise, but much praise is a dangerous weapon which each side may too much employ and thus competing with each other go to excess and only win disgust from court and jury. The time so taken from a true discussion and energy thus lost when added to the degradation caused thereby, make up a sum of loss which more than equals any gain therefrom. With great respect the jury should be treated, becoming the high function they discharge. This tends to lift them to a lofty plane above the mists of petty bias and here they should be kept that they may reason, free from unworthy motives. He who believes his cause is just, should be content with this and so will find a surer pathway to success. We who promotes a spurious plea, depending on confusion and vile motives for success, will always strive to drag the jury down from this high plane. Occasionally he may succeed with some juries by reason of their untrained minds to detect false lights or closely note the lines where duty bids them move. While such men are employed, the false will sometimes win and justice stumble. Such results can be avoided, if at all, when he whose cause is just sticks to the higher plane and never in the least degree soils his clean hands with any kind of baseness. The minds of untrained men are easily upset and turned awry by conflict and confusion; they move but slowly, and he is wise who hurries not or tries to hurry them. The advocate should take the necessary time to clearly make the point he undertakes, painting the back ground for the thing he would present, so that it will stand out distinct in all its parts, thus stamping on the juror's mind an image that will last until the consultation room is reached. CURRENT DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME CLEVELAND GRAYSON, Plaintiff in Error, vs. No. 963. LEGUS PERRYMAN, Guardian Defendant in Error. (Rendered Dec. 14th, 1909.) Error from the District Court of Tulsa County. J. H. Pitchford, Trial Judge. Dismissed. Appeals and proceedings in error may be taken from the judgments of the district court to the Supreme Court regardless of the amount in controversy. 2. The regular judge of any district may be designated to hold any term of court in any other district in the state. 3. Where a judge from one district is designated to hold a term of court in another district and presides at the trial of a cause within the extended time, he may sign and settle the case-made in the state outside of the district in which the cause was tried. 4. It neither appearing from the record nor aliunde that the case-made was served on the opposite party or his attorney of record or that notice of the time and place of its presentation to the trial judge for signing and settling, the appeal will be dismissed. (Syllabus by the Court.) Bynum & Allen, for plaintiff in error. W. J. Gregg, for defendant in error. STATEMENT OF FACTS. Judgment was rendered in this action in the district. court of Tulsa county on the 26th day of May, 1909. On the 29th day of May, 1909, motion for new trial was filed and on the same day overruled and exceptions saved and the time for making and serving case-made was extended to sixty days and an order issued providing that five days notice should be given of the time when the casemade would be presented for settlement The case was tried before John H. Pitchford, Judge of the first district, he having been duly assigned by order of the Chief Jus |