Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1838-02-09


themselves satisfied with their location. There
about fifty thousand Indians settled of the
Mississippi
20 The great Clay meeting at New Orleans,
held on the 27th January in the Arcade. 1t was com
posed of citizens from every part of the Union, and
minated Mr.. Clay to the Presidency, subject TO the
voice ola National Convention which it recommended
should be held in independence Hail. Philadelphia, on
the 4th July next.
CIscu.r CocRr, Wednesday, Feb. before Judge
Edwards.
Rowen and Harrington versus Green and Gulick.
This was action brought to $500, the al
legged loss sustained by non-iulflment of contract
on the part of the defendants 1t appears that the
plaintiffs contracted to bcy 100 cords of wood, at l2S
feet TO the cord, OF the deendants written agree
ment drawn up, and the wood was delivered and
paid for. But between The time vi drawing up the
agreement and the delivery of the wood, these words
were inlerllnsd IN the agreement =" TO be good sap
ling wood of the best quality" The defence was that
these words were inerlncd without consent or know
ledge Of the defendants. The nerlHeation in the
same hand writing as the original agreement; and
the plaintiffs say that II was made both with the
sent and knowledge Of the defendants before the
wood was delivered and that such delivery they
found that they sustained loss in the value of the
wood, rs contracted for equivalent 10 the amount
claimed.
The iuage decided that unless the plaintiffs brought
evidence to show that the nerlneaton in the contract
was made by the consent and knowledge of the de-
PENDANTS they must submit TO a nonsuit, or verdict
must be given for the defendants. nonsuit was
submitted to.
CousT or COMMON PLEAS, Wednesday, Feb. BE
fore Judge acknowledgements Green versus John
Hlllyer, the late Sheriff
This was an action for damages sustained by false
imprisonment ltarose out Of family quarrel. The
elder brother of Miss Green wished get possession
of his younger sister. He took out execution and
this was taken TO serve by under sheriff Lucas. Ii
appears that he went 10 the premises of Miss Green
-crawled in at the back window, and took her from
the bed to the bridewel prison, where she was kept
Jour days and nights before the sheriff would consent
10 her release. 1t also appeared that bail bond was
drawn up in her behalf to which the names Of four
five persons were attached amongst Others
Mr. Peet and Mr.. BodsetL The sheriff objected to Peet
and one other at FIRST because he didn't know them
and after this because they had been sued on &C.
commodaton note, TO which they were endorsers.-
For the plaintiff II was sworn 10 that al the time Of
sgning Miss Green's bail bond Peet was worth
$751; and Blodgett worth $4,000 over and and
above their debts, and therefore the sherioHght 70
have accepted them and released Miss Green.
For the defence il commended that all their pro-
perry consisted Of lands long way of, $40 600
worth of which could be bought for $40 each. The
amount of the execution was was 81 400
The Judge charged that under the execution it was
fret the duty Of the Sheriff take The goods Of the
defendant in the execution, and in default Of goods
10 take the body. He did this, and the plaintiff had
Drougnt an acuon against Nun lot Oilclei mscon-
duct. BY law, she was bound 10 tender the sheriff
two sufficient surencs She AYERS that she did do
this but as the sheriff can't Ne presumed TO know
the worth Of all men in the community he Is entitled
to sufficient time to Hnd out il the suretIes proisrcd
be sufficient and responsible before he releases The
prisoner Ii was for the jury to say whether by ex-
ercising ordinary diligence he could have ascerained
this fact to have released the prsone. earlier IL
he could have done so, he Is lable but the plaintiff
having brought the action against the officer is bound
TO make OFT her case-to prove 10 the satisfaction of
the Jury that two of the surctes rendered were rsspon.
sibe for 81, 400. The bond had been exhibited in
court with the names attached; for the Jury to
say under the evidence whether the sheriff could by
the exercise Of reasonable diligence have chosen two
men from il worth 81, 400. And as a rule 10 guide
them he would observe, that where a man did not
pay his own debts, IL was fair presumption that he
was not good and responsible man for the debts of
others Or a man who suffered himself 10 be sued as
the endarser Of note, could not be- considered a.
good surety an endorser occupying the position of a
surety. But If the jury were satisfied that she fur
ni.hcd two names which the sheriff with proper dill
gence could have asceriained to be good Cor 81 400
she was entitled 10 verdict
They retired, with orders to bring in scaled YER
dict.
C....-1- rs~.-- ,Jc.aIov Eok,usxyT u.f~xu