New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1846-06-27

e.vtos PLrls-Monday.--Par Nos il3. ll7,l2l
Ia. gas s. H. 49, 81. Part Mos. 1873, 900. 2O2,
- oc6 2os 49, 2l2 pa ais, 900. 222 224, 22e, u.s.
So,es of issue for the July term OF the Circuit and s
tbor Courts must be died on or before "Wednesday
Law Courts.
r,scr1T Couar.-Before Judge EdmonoaICner1s
i,,ley vs. IorGdn L. Mott Action OF samuel 80
~. s,oro a6io;pnr each other IL 10 charged
Is.t Mr. Mot. stated 10 some OF par. os'eS no ,5
ss.i had lnfringed his (Mosts patent apo ne ~oua
ro sue him because he ws, an o W. a,oves
~, that he would sue any one thar so.o us
tu NJ ,bi, Il svcrred, Mr.. Postey sustain
IRA, LOSE and the present action 10 brought TOT Ge
,se sverred that the comm non W go
stassa-,ha, Mr. NJ really considered that ice stoves
VIOLATION OF his patent and that be has since oo-
verde, OF $500 against one OF ihs parties ior an
Infringement of his patent ne oouis If
a-smsrks in relation 10 the asserted ihifihee"eb' VI
,i'e, vrere privileged claimed but INC jury must
,Yor,der whether the assertions AZ 10 nso,e. -,
- m malice or otherwise. II NOT )usuueo 10 ,' -
~ ,ls,nti Ia entitled 10 recover for any special Damage
he nav have shown aud such general damages as .ne
Nr might consider the case to warrant. Ee1oet io'
E.i,,4 slOCO damage and ak cents costs FOR Pian'
fss Measrs Carpenter and Graham FOR seiI "e'''
bradley and Mills
! crprR1os couar-Before Judge VanderpoeL-fom . a.
Earino vs. Yarper Decentralization 10 IeeoVei "u
r No, nuh,I.hny novel called Dolores already re-
erred to- the defence TO which was ISL. 'a. .. 49,,
IA no: fully agree 10 publish and. "a, thal even '
IA yrO
-. ,endencv nv which they had right 10 reiuseto puo-
s The Jury after being out or hours snd ceSsrng
n would be impossible 10 agree. were dschsreeo We uh
asrstsnd they about equally divided on oo'n pon'
defence. &c , o., y,
that II the work WAS oppoed TO the Bible and 10 good
masls tho defendants JUSTIFIED Ill noi puoI'sung'
sy,p If they had agreed publish. The objection 10 H.
bnyever must not be based mere sectariah pOlhis
"a come thin the rule must be opposed 10 All rego
and the tendency Of the work as whoe, must DE Vi
an lrregious and immoral character. IN oiuet ~ a.
I've al This conclusion, 1t will not answer 20 lake Du one
de OF dialogue and omit the other. Were This 10 be
ooe Millions Paradise Lost and many others Oh lhe
leI and purest works exiant would be condemned.
IA 10 the facts Mr. Ward the friend OF Sir. Harring,
.,ed ,ha, he considered the agreement final for the
Nessrs Harper to publish 10 GOO copies OF the work
each party bear hall the expense and nall the proht or
lo,s The defendants deny that such was The case 10
odef TO show that Messrs H. wished 10 get rid OF the
,n1ertakng Note shown addressed to their Critic
No which he requested to read enough OF the WORK to
give bis dissent to IT, as the work likely TO maze three
huge volumes &C. Even they wished to get rio OF Inc
work said the Court purely account OF It's not being
II the Jury consider that II was irregous or
immoral they had right TO get rid OF It, 10 argued
BY plaintiffs Counsel that the defendants have p9onsoeo
oher works such the Wandering Jew aud the .hys
ter of Paris OF much greater immortality than this-
,ba, is reason why they should puoi''n this -
II they have erred In publishing the others. ana
this is really immoral they are right in retracing
,hsr steps The high character Of the defendants as
publishers and men, and also OF the ability and Inc
sacrfces of the plaintiff in the cause OF human freedom
have been urged and /. believed justly But with these
the Jury have nothing TO do 1t lie mere question
whether contract made. aud If 1t was whether
there good In the character OF the book to
break that contract The Jury could not agree, as al
ready stated and were discharged.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAs.-BefcIe Judge UlshoeAer-
Alexander Honner vs.. Robert Henry-The defendant kept
At his lumber yard. corner Prince and Thompson sts 9
large dog which chained through the day and lei
out sometimes II SAID in the afternoon. On the 4th
February last Francis Of Mr. Holer, about year:
of age was running IN SPORT rast the corner when the
dog sprang after him, knocked the lad Francis down
and seized and considerably lacerated his leg Action
brought against the owner 10 recover damages It being
contended that the dog was vicious animal and unt
to be allowed go ut large Verdict for plaintiff $50
which carried costs For plaintiff Mr. Van HoVenbure!
and Mr. Fray-for defendant Messrs PRIME and Durri
James a. Frost VS.. John BruH-Mr. +. sold TO Mr.. Is
the good will and fixtures OF his BARRIERS shop In Carmne
vt for which be pay SIPS He took possession, bu
subsequently found that mortgage of $3.50 rested upof
hem and he quit refusing rat!fy the agreement &C
ton Is brought recover the amount Verdict Tor DC
fendan For planiin, Mr. Niles; for defendant, Mr.
Shuf,llt