The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1844-01-31

ducs sugar and have far perfected their euts
expect the approaching season. TO ds
at has been asc ained that nearly all the lands on snd
in the vicinity OF Galveston Bay which have been
garded unsuited for cotton viii produce sugar in
greater perfection than the best lands oil Louisiana
city Intelligence.
POitce.-TUEsDAY, Jan. SO-ARRksr SoR LisEL-John
Knowles appeared At the Centre street Police Othes
hshing libel against him IN I" The Sabe1i sneanS
warrant issued Tor Mikes arrest 10 answer the charge
Dhs1RrKRs FRioATE RARIIAs day ar.
rested by police orlcers What the her
discipline Yesterday three were arrested and returned
Coromer's Oaice.-russpAr, jan s0-A woman
named Ann Doughery found dead IN her bed II
80 Orange street, She had formerly been a empsrsts
woman, but recently had become an invsteTas gin
drinker, and had been living with coorsd man MA
mistress The investigation oil the Coronsrs jury result
| ed in verdict oil dselh nom in,empeIsnce.
Common Pleas
Before Judge Ingrahanl sar
JANUARY 3o-.4isop Chaunty, w. Cunnin x.an-Thts
was action on pomssory note Tor >loo gwen BY
the defendant tor goods purchased. The not bsip x
paid maturity, protested and Cunningham having
entered into atneIsmp with Devoe, JOINT wss
Tor Si6O at w days. 10 retrieve the past
expense protest, &c. This last having
been paid, thu expiration o the 20 the
had been commenced the old note, which laa
been suspended renewed Thv defence maintained
that the plaintiffs had er 10 recover ON he original
note inssmuch as they had accepted the Joint nole in
iull satisfaction, and to MAINTAIN the point,
shown that Alsop, two days alter the joint had
been sent to his hrm had called al the store Of
ing the partnership and having ascersned from De-
personally his the business with Gun
bingham, had protested himself satisfied with the note.
but did not according agreement send back return
the original note The defence further up that the
why the joint note paid maturity was.
that had been entered their bill book w
days, not ought to have been 60 days that
as the discovered, the urn offered 10 the
note ia full and pay hall the costa incurred trngin
the present suitbu this reused the plaintiffs
tanning that the not good iaith but
gain Time The Court in charging he jury observed that
the only question Tor them decide on whether the
joint note had been taken full discharge OF the org
If the jury did believe that this the case
held as security for the original note, then tbs
Joint note not having bean retired maturity the PLAIN
tifs could sustain the acton the original lhs only
when a note has been received in iull discharge The
fact that Aop told Cunningham at the time vi has taking
the joint note that the the original note had been
suspended, show ed conciusiveiy that Cunningham
not discharged Ia full. The jury alter short alb
ssnce returned verdict for the plaintiff Sl7s os
ages with costs.
John Cessey Vs. Joseph Jenkins and John DanisIs
cotton OF trespass. third party named Stone
ed in answer est npentus. The cause OF action
histhe plantih Ia drygoods merchant in Canal street.
to which place he had removed In May last from Csha
street. bringing with him large dog which he he'd
purchased the October previous for Sl2 Ibis dog WEI
claimed by Stone his and in July last oone
the store OF the plaintiff in company with jenkins, who
constable oil the Filth Ward and ths other defendant
Daniels who wss to recognize the dogand Stone theIv
upon seized the dog per and carried him Tor
this the defending sued The defence
set that stone the actual trespasker that tbs
other defendants aiding lbettng the orci
Bile removal Of the dog but actually present BY the
permission OF the plaintiff Tor the purpose Of recognising
the dog claimed by stone IL they could The Govt how
ever charged the facts presented by the planuh,
and the jury gave him verdict for SlsV damages and
costs For plaintiff Mr. Price; for defence, Mar. Warner.