Wisconsin herald, and Grant County advertiser. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1844-1845, 1845-10-04
lgeyicw of Court.

cases but few and generally void OF interest at
the present term; and never since the Pepper
dynasty. have there been so few people IN at
tendance a, court. We believe il has been
generally remarked however, tina, those who
hare attended have been far better provided for
and accommodated than at any former term of
court. They have had more room--betier
Iodgings-beiier fare; there has been no resort,
10 hay mows and buffalo skins for lodgings
no rushing. crowdiog, grunling and squealing
10 get al the public feeding uoughs. Hunger
has not, as sometimes formerly 10 Lancaster,
broken through panel doors and smashed down
chairs and tables. We are glad of this. 1t is
high time that county as wealthy and popu.
ous and refined as ours, and we may add, as
liberal, and as ready to pay for good accom-
modaions al court as the citizens Of Grant are.
should be well provided for and made in every
respect comfortable. We have now, in Lancas-
ter beside Mr.. BanflI's house, which is pro-
verbally good mouse and well kept ard am.
ply provided in every particular, another large
and commodious hotel, completely furnished,
the Gran, Co House, kept by Messrs. Tomp-
kins 4. Blanding; and when these prove in
sufficient for all, we have many large, new.
commodioos private dwelling houses in our
growing village, where board may doubtless
be had during court. People who attend
court, no, only have right TO expect good
fare, but they have also a right TO- expect mod
crate charges. No man attending court as a
lawyer in these "brefess days" or especially
as witness or juror can afford to pay more
Than bis fees for his subsistence. There is no
excuse for stealing nowadays.
The following cases have been disposed of
for the present term. as follows;
BR GiIlet VS.. G w Bruce-assumpsii. en-
Joined.
Il Manner, appellee, VS.. L S Bowen, appel
lant-assumpsi. enjoined.
w S Derring. admr. VS.. n Cuny-as-
sumpst, referred.
Le,cher, appellee, vs. Hodges,-debi, judg.
ment affirmed.
Gaford. appellee, VS.. Ash. appellant-as.
sumpst, nonsui. by plaintiff.
Patterson VS.. Gilmore and o,hers-,respass.
dismissed by plaintiff.
Oliver, appellee, vs.. Robinson, appellant
assumpsi,. judgment affirmed.
Smell VS.. reighton--a,tachment judgment
affirmed.
Frechelte VS. Northumberland, quashed.
Coyle and Coyle vs.. Woolley ct aIs-re-
plevin, dismissed by plaintiff.
Carlos vs.. Peron.o, e, as--replevin, dismis-
sed by plaintiff.
Harrington VS.. Dorsey judg-
ment for plaintiff,
Kinney vs.. Bushee-assumpsit, dismissed
at plaintiffs cost in default of bond
Eastman vs.. Field-a.tachment. verdict g.
judgment against garnishee and motion for
new trial.
Rountree VS.. Field-attachmen,, continued
as to garnishee.
Barr VS.. Field-attachmen;. continued as to
garnishee.
Jefferson vs. Reynolds
sed at cost Of defendant.
Lagree VS.. Glesson--assumpsit. verdict and
judgment for plaintiff. motion for new trial.
Craig VS.. Thawaii-assumpsii. continued
generally
Farmer, appellee. VS.. Kndle impleaded with
Noble. sppellanl-trespass. hung jury, coniiu-
ue6.
Gridey, appellee, VS.. Elliott, appellant
debt, judgment reversed
Smith, appellee. VS.. Tompkins, ct al. appel.
lan,--assunpsit, judgmen, affirmed.
Gatey. Coonce & Belzhoover VS.. McGun-
nigle s. Way--attachment. judgment for
plaintiffs.
Fransworth g. Ferguson VS.. Kibble-attach-
Judgment by default for plaintiff.
Darlington. c, al admr. VS.. Stephens--asr
sumpsi,. dismissed by agreement, each party
paying his own cost.
Bushee VS.. Kinney & Coons-assumpsit,
dismissed by plaiatid
White & Smith VS.. Vineyard & Bass-as-
sumpsit. continued with al. plur. writ.
Blow g. Co. VS.. Morrison-assumpsi;, con-
continued with al, plur writ.
Tn. ct ais VS.. Link, e, als--ejectment. yer.
diet and judgmen, for plaintiffs, and motion for
new Trial.
Forbes VS. NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. default
and writ of inquiry to assess plaintiff 5 dam
ages.
OTIS vs.. nwright--atiachmen Judgment
by defau, for plaintiff and writ of inquiry.