The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-03-23
TWO CENTS.
Law InteIllaence.

Law Intelligence.
CoURT OF APPkALs, ScHENKcr ADV March n Ialo
Present., al the Judges Nos 10 aud 2O-rhe srru-
msnt Of these causes commenced yesterday con-
motion granted, diminishing the appeal In this
without costs, the 18th inst, the motion
Hullin, counsel for sppelsnt appeared to day, and
made application to be heard the motion dismssiug
the appeal which was granted and the rule dsmssiag
the appeal vscAtsd, and the counsel permitted to
argue the osse, which was commenced. Mr.. J Malhn
for appellant Mr. Charles q Myers for respondents.
hold two q ssons day; ope ming court ct A. NJ and
taxing recess frsm l21s to 2XP M.
Court OF APPEALS, ScnErEorApY, March T-No.
in error, vs. stephen whitney Tho srgumsnt Of this
cause commenced yesterday continued until the
MONDAY, March 1s-No N.-Johu psRuvtsr ". tho
Trustees Of st Peters church In tho city OF YORK.
30. sppell'ts, and John Powell, ct 81 rsspondenss
This cause was argued Saturday rnoon (l7th)
Theodore Ssdwiok for appellants; Mr. john &. Dsvs-
lin, for respondents. No 22-Henry NJ Western, sp-
pellsnt, vs. George H. Kelsey, stal respondents rhs
csuie was called, and producing the casss for the
court they found to be- defective and the cause
was passed Tho court then called through the easn-
not boon previously disposed Of passed. No. 30
Nicholas G.. Kcrfright, appellant, vs. Robert Alas
esv. granted to the appellant to argue the cause en
psrs. MI Joseph Blunt counsel for appellant no
appearing for respondent. No N-Nios's q. Korteght
appelant,vs Robt Anslis Ct al respondents The hko
order In No. 49, No. Edwards Innes, plsint in
error, vs.. David Reeves, ct al defendants error.
MIR Edward Sanford, counsel for dsfsnda In error
for judgment Of Armsnce in this cause and it
was stated to the Court that MIR. NJ HILL jr the
counsel fer the plaintiff In error, and was then sick
and confined to his house. The Court therefore
fured to permit . default to DO taken No. 3l-John
Peck, appellant, vs. David L. Ssyr., rsspondeut. Re
No. william X. Blair, appellant, W. stephen D.
Dhlaye, respondent Judgment Of afnrmssos BY de-
.nt No. ss~Lsonara Appisby, pisintia in error, va
John Brewer, Receiver, Ec., defendant in error
Judgment Of afarm.nce by default. Mr.. Edward Sam
ford counsel for defendant in error. No. 87Gsorge
Nichols, plaintiff in error, ". VIM. c. DussnbuIy.
ct n. dsfendant In error This to 10 submit
ted on printed arguments and points. No. es-Ed-
mund Merry respondent, against Russell Sturgis ap-
pellsnt-Judgment affirmed BY default. MI O. +.
W1sSs .npssns ~ VIM pous.. mo-
Default Of respondent entered, and granted to
appellant to nish the cases and argue the
The Court made the following order Ordered, that
term Of this court be held 1t the oours in the
Tu.sa.y Of NV next The Court will ssrssts ~s near
any causes where both parties ready bat de-
faults Will BE- allowed and no particular order will be
nrst both parties are ready that stand Arst on
the calendar. -. t-
TunspAY, March 20 No 20 Isaac Newton at a.
appelA nts vs. Jonathan Wells ct al. appsess. Ar
gaed, Mr. Samuel Stevens, for appslants Mr. John A.
Collier ,,r fSr .ppsss' No 70 CornsuA D Lswrsnoe
Argued. Mr. Daniel Lor!, for plaintiff Ia error; Mr.
Edward Sanford for defendant in Not concluded
IT the hour Of adjournment HN g.
NEwsrArER CAsE.-Ths folio Wing case was recently
decided In the Supreme Court, at Bristol :-JAsper
HARDING Va Henry DWoh action of assampsit for tho
recovery Of nine yeare subscr ptop TO the Pensypa-
nso Inquirer, newspaper publiahsd at Philadelphia
IL was proved the part OF the plaintiff
OF the defendant on his subscription books from
1880 to lSA4; that the paper regularly enclosed
wspper dirscts to the dsfe ndant and deposited
In tho post ONCE In that city Blr for paper
aso been forwarded The defer MOD svsr hav-
Ing ordered the paper The ruled that the regu
lar mailing Of newspaper for length time vas at
least pyia Iacie evidence OF its reesptioo sud taat
receiving paper for certain time and orderi nv
the ssme discsntinued sufficient to hold person
liable for the subscription price, he
may never have ordered tho paper sent Verdict for
plaintiff.
The GREAT New ORLEANS LAND CASE DECIDED -
The at land suit of the heirs Dubrssil Vilars vs.
Jos M Kennedy aud others, being for the block of
ground on which the United States Branch Mint of
this oity situated yeserdsy deodsd in favor OF
tho defendants. The United States 60 IL the
real party defendant In this action The suit involved
the title to portion of the Third and First Munoi-
Relities property worth psrhsps, Sl6 900 oOO-
This was made test suit. The defsn dauts Kennedy
and Others ooers In the United States Branch Mint
q New Orleans, were represented BY Levi PIERCE and
L y. Dursnt, United Suites District Attor nsy VINO
causd the First Municipality In warranty to dsfSud
the title Of the United States; the lot Of eround in
conirovsrty having been donated by the First NUM-
cipality for the purpose Of building upon the Mint
The First Municipality was represented by c. RsseIius
sns Robert Preux The heirs Of Villsrs were repre-
,entrd BY the Hon Henry clay snd Others. IN. O.