New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1847-07-08

s-,rrs c,ncvIr CovRr Before Judge Mel
CSnsct.tons amanda L. PonJrd vs ~
49, a,5ssinssrat0r Of james Ponsford Geeeessa No.
- Al AIS rife and James H. PoastoFd = nis ~ ~
f"s,, mimi in relation - the law OF divorce.
wy Is,ea Pons.ord was proceeded asenN py pio,ias
= oh,siot divorce from him on 'ne g,oun nb,n
sT,v subs quently he induced comp,sinsL N
,r.nda Louiss Mossin) 70 go secIeiy 70 r. Tbomss
sr,v They were united In 1897 by hes. aIb
s,srsrron of the Methodist Church theTe-ss,' -
- rstu,ned 10 New York and lived IS iAh n,,nned
- wife froIn whom he bad been -, n,;,ed 10
1870 in hi. Ciiy and finally maTrieo' Oci"e N''
I.,s po.,ford oied 10 isf5 up to wh'ch un, ,,
a. "a amanda had lived together ss m ,s u -.
ielsf, children or heir. sa mi, ard her brother
~ NJ p.asC,rd .ho were CHILDREN on oroihtr OF
$500 AZ, p left estate worm oetNeen t0V,VVV
" $1,000 Immediately on his death Mr. Johnson
ss,esnd Of Margaret TOOK ont letters o.
s~s.sd b acknowledge Amanda L. the complainant
e..e a. the widow Of Jamcs saying her marriage
10 -, rss Illegal he having had divorce rendered
'..t him could not marry again While his nrst vile
"a The said Amanda now resides In Jersey City,
~ .ction in The United States Court cOnendlDg
-, :. her marriage legal IN the State OF Now Jer
W hers il was eelebrstfd il is 80 In New York-tbst
~ x.s unaware Of the said James having been d.
,ore,d snd supposed bis hrst vile was dead she
,,.s 10 be entitled to a moiety Of the estate Of ssd
80. ana 0OO additional according 10 law. Testimony
-. ,.ksu--MessrsW Bliss and George Wood appeared
a., complainant. and Messrs Walker and Lord opposed
The Cour, decided rs follows;
The Court find that the marriage OF the complainant
..h lame. Ponsford deceased, was lawful and valid
ia, she IL entitled 10 all the rights OF the lawful widow
n. aid F. under the laws OF the State OF New iork-
dthshe defendant Is bound to account and pay over
Lar distdbutge share"
Esied States VS. Ship Rec0Ydr.-The Recorder ia
srs,,b vessel and beed for Infringement OF the
Carrying trade in bringing from London quantity OF
E.s lncia gums IL was shown that The gums were the
s,ouce OF British possession In the Esst Indies The
court considered therefore, that abe had nghtto
lrine them. Libel n, missed.
EeddeA general assignee, vs.. hHeetands.-Bili ais
missed.
Yqrkkurs. VS. Kiasman and Hale-lpiunciicn granted.
Adams and oilers VS. barnard and has-Judgncnt
for ainiiii on the verdict to be adjusted.
Yen Hook VS. PendlefoH and Leach Referred TO 9
Master ~ take proof TO the alleged violation oil panc
ton- - -
eisions -Henry j. Carr Bark Zeqobta Decided
that the te6nt the can hold The yessei IN REM
and the captain ia personcm on the same libel.
Josfph Iois VS. STEAMBOAT North AD1sTtcd Libel ior
wseesThe man offered the iull amount said 70 DC
due TO him. which he refused and II was lei ioI nl
with third party he then ioeiied me steaioosa ~,
much larger amount but subsequently took the money
left tor him and gave receipt Motion IL MADE 10 nave
the libel dismissed the debt is settled, but messrs
Burr & Benedict s attorneys oppose, and say they
have right 10 go on. The Court refused 70 DISMISS tne
libel and the motionls denied
SUPERIOR CouRr-Before Judge Oakley -WoOdhpH &
Mir ptrH vs. ID. M Wuson q C0~-The Court IN this case
being Oh bill of sale of iron at mos" already re-
tered to- charged that was for the Jury to say IRON
The evidence. whether the words "a mos are under'
,,ood rs meaning that the purchaser sha give his note
A, mos or whether 1t ordinary book debt. The
Jury considered the former and gave verdict for plain
tf 10 amount. Messrs w 1t was said, had previously
purchased come Tin of w g. NJ which did not turn out
!. the respective parties supposed II would which was
TIE cause Of their not giving note although they
subsequently offered 10 pay the cash The controversy
10 this case to the costs OF suit which Messrs W.
will have 10 pay