The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1848-10-22


''How! how.'' "Why, sir, like the man IN Ohio.
/ suppose--he will vote by ballot" 'IIa! hal hal"
Taylor" '.Why so, sr!' because he started
HIM from Point Isabel and ] believe he is going
TO put him though
Finally, we submit the letters of our late recon.
nolssance of OHIO and Pennsylvania, to the careful
perusal of the reader and the merit of liberal and
industrious investigation will at least be awarded
THE Doctor.
Law Intelligence.
CIRcVIT CouRT, October 20.-Before Justice Strong.
Sophia Thompson rs. Il. C. Morrs.-Ths cause, re-
ported in yesterday paper, concluded to-day, by
the jury rendering verdict for plaintiff for $50
dapages.
Duncan Haggart aud Reuben Dunn IS. Jacob Bran.
do gee and others.-This action on a bond for
S22Co, executed on the 18th November, 1S47. II APP
pears the parties entered into building contract that
is the plaintiffs contracted to build two houses for
certain for the defendant the work to be finished
at given time the contract contained clause pre-
yidpg extra work, and in any difficulty
between the parties that it should be lett to arbra-
tors to be appointed as therein mentioned. Extra
work performed and difficulty arose in relation
to it, and to the performance of the contract generally
arbitrstors were thereupon appointed, and deed of
submission executed, which provided that the award
should be made or before given day the arbtra.
tors proceeded to arbtrate but unable to deliver
the award the day mentioned in the deed of sub
enlarge the time saying that his client was not then
in the city, and he had authority the proceedings
the award were then dropped, and the plaintiffs
property az non resident debtor. TO discharge the
property from the attachment the bond in question
was given. There we're three defences set up hrst,
plaintiffs should have declared the original con-
tract aecondly, the defendants counsel offered to
show that his client not nonresident debtor,
at the time the attachment was issued and, thirdly,
that the question had been arbtrated and an award
made. To the first defence the plaintiffs counsel re-
Piled that the deed Of submission and bond
precluded the defendant from setting up that defence
to the second, namely that defendant was not non
hiatt bat
dicata the defendant might, IL he thought proper,
have appeared before tire officer who granted the at
tachment, and made the point before him; that not
having done So he precluded from setting up
q defence To the third defence it replied that
would make but that they had not time to reduce to
writing that counsel for both parties attended before
them on the day the award was to be delivered, and
plaintiffs counsel offered to consent to enlarge the
time which the defendants council refused and that,
therefore, the arbitration fell to the ground The
the Jury inst ses
alton which offered by defendant to show that
was through the plaintiffs means the arbitrators did
not make their award the day me ntioned in the
deed Of submission; and If they would find for the
defendants Verdict for plaintiff $751; subject to
| ceptions taken by defe ndants' counsel
| CIRCUIT CouRr Oct. 2l-Adjeurned Special Term
| Before Judge Maynard -Paientine rs. iilet.-Ths
cause given to the jury to-day and verdict
dered for the plaintiff.
Benjamin L. Benson Samuel L. Lescom6.-This was
action of eectment for two lots of land at Harlem
| conveyed
wife in 1889 the were several judgments against her
husband. In some time after the conveyance to Mrs
Lescomb, she and her husband mortgaged the lots
| to one Henry MCGOWAN Subsequently, one Of the
judgment creditors issued an exception on bis judg-
ment and cold the property which was purchased BY
one Halcomb who Above the defe nda Mt nd his family
to remain in possession At the expiration of fifteen
months. MCGOWAN became assignee Of another Of the
judgments called upon the sheriff to redeem offered
to him the Amount of the execution and req ured
him to give him, MCGOWAN, deed Of the property.
The plaintiff who was also Judgment creditor OF de-
t.nlyu nfo
date, and also called on the sheriff and put in his
claim for deed. The sheriff, finding that he va: as
sgnee Of the earliest udgme him deed OF the
ots and he brings this possession under
that deed The defence Get alty in the
plaintiffs as the statute required
that the true amount due on the judgments should
be set out in the affidavit and that $50 was paid on one
Of The assigned judgments, which was not credited:
and further that the statute required certificates Of
the to be filed in the county clerk
office, which was not done upon those points Defend
ants counsel insisted that the defendant entitled
to verdict The court directed verdict for the plain
tiff subject to the opinion OF the court in banco on
there questions
shoeftr-Ho5sas Corpus-Ln re Henry German, Ell al.
in this matter it appeared that Edward German the
father of Henry and the other child, volunteered to
60 to xco in the LIST regiment of New York volun-
teers that both before and after his departure from
this city his wife was woman OF intemPerate habits
sequence Of which the children were sent to the
Amr house and from tina. institution sent to the
Society for the Relief of the Frendless, where the
children have since remained; were taken great care
Of and it seems interested the trustees and the per-
having the immediate charge Of the establishment
in their favor The father arrived in this city shor,
time since became reconciled to his wife, and caused
writ Of hdbeas corpus to issue to get the custody OF
the children, which strenuously opposed by the
trustees the ground Of the improper Conduct Of the
n other. His Honor said, he had power to leave the
children with the Society; that the law mperativey
comm landed that they should be given to the father
but he thought that he (Gorman) was acting inju-
seemed to be so well taken Of until he sure
that his wife had reformed
SupSEMw CouRr.-Special Term October 2l-Before
Justice Barculo-Ldra Tyler Potter of Charles Tyler
dtcee.ed rs. f. and r. PopPe-Ths bill in this cause
fled for accountit appeared that, in 1841 the
deceased nsferreda consignmen Of Burgundy win
from firm in this city to the defe that shortly
afterwards, he made three coDsignments Of bottled
sberres directing the defendants to place them in
dry bonded store, and keep them insured; they were
upsccompa lied by invoices the defendants as they
insist nder the advice Of the Custom House officers
and of Mr. Harries the friend of MIR. Tyler made out
inv oces here arc placed the of the consignor
to them. and then parsed the property through the
Custom House and paid the duties giving bonds to
produce the invoices The plaintiff insisted that
this act not only fraudulent. but breach OF In
STR ctions and that defe ndants became liable for
psssirg the Custom Ilouse, kept in the private
store Of defendas4o and the plaintiff insisted that
! by removing those wines from the Custom House
lock contrary orer their character for purity be-
came suspected and that they we're deprec from
rs TO IS per cent. Whilst the wines in their
store tie great ire 1sl5 occurred, and the wines
wereost At the time of the fire the dee had two
yearly policies for about $40 900 all the goods in their
store: both policies mutual companies, one of
which remain solvent and the other of which failed
The plaintiff claimed to hold the defe ndAnts as private
insurers the ground both Of their having devated
from instructions removing the wines from the Gus
tom Iouse lock- and also because they insured in the
mutual com pancs. The point as strongly urged on
the Court that contignee, with instructions to in
sure, violated his duty and made himself personally
liable II he insured the property in mutual ONCE,
without the expiess consent Of his principal II ap
peared from the that the