New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-06-27
LAW COU r rs.


CouRr CALEsDAR-This DGy.-SUPERioR
CoURT-Nos 27l, 22O POI, 234, 24l to 244, 246 2i7,
24s 25O 1888 67 49, 49, ls9 PSI 70 pol, 263 to 25s,
go to 273 275 to 255.
SUPERIOR CoURr-B efore Judge Oakley
Grace r. Ferguson vs. Jams Fergusoa.-51t Tor
Diyorce-The case was tried before, Il will be re-
collected and n verdict rendered Tor Mrs. f. pat set
aside by the ether bTanch OF this Court judges
Campbell, Duer and Maaon) and new tral, or
feiened issue granted The counsel having been
called aud 10 person appearing for Mrs. f. Ca mo
ton Of counsel for hr + syerdlct was rendered
in his favor by default with costs.
SfrpAen Whitney vs.. CITY Of Ner York Suit
as to right Of wharfage OF 40 ieet bukhead at
South st between Pike and Market slips. 10 l77O
it was determined to extend that part OF the City
from Cherry to Water ST. and in 1898 leave vas
granted by the Legislature to build S0uthst Mr.
Whitney owned 70 feet extending from Cherry It,
TO the water In 1896. 5outh st. at that time ex
ten ding up Only as far as Peck slp) it was deter
mined 10 erect bGlkhead, and further extend II to
Ms ket ard Peck slips, whch included Mr.. Whit
news 70 feet. The City, after the street being
extended, erected pier 80 ieet VIDE a. o)uIn
ct On part OF the IS ieeS NJ. Waitaey having re.
fused TO join in it. He subsequently Gained
that having filed up to the bakhead, he was emit
tied to oil the property to his original line, In Tee
pursuant 70 bis ors nsl graut, and entitled to the
Wharfage at the bulkhead and entire control-the
CITY having TO other rs than 10 the use OF the
street He obtained a verdict in bis favor in 1917,
for A. years wharfage ITO the time the suit
was commencedl at $500 year. The case was
carried TO the Court Of Appeals and sent back Tor
pew trial principally the point that evidence as
10 usage had been improperly admitted on the Tor
mer Trial The cause was called on yesterday.
On b, half Of the City it was couteaded that the
grant Of Mr.. Whitncy extended only to low water
marx and did not include South ST that the city had
L. ME in no
the land refusing 10 do so, and collect wharfage.
verdict was taken pro t0rma Tor $1,000 and odd,
hhe amount in SAL with interest from that period,
leaving the relative rights Of the parties to farther
appeal The Wharfage since the suit was COM
menced lnow about SIX ears viii be the sub sct
Of another suit unless compromised For palntin
Messrs +. SANFORD and Geo. Wood For defend
ant Messrs II. Z. Davies and VIM. Kent.
Austin Mclean vs. John I0yloT-Mr. Met. IS
amanufacturer Of cotton yarn and cotton goods iat
ter principally musquito nets, for the soatnern
market. MIR Tay Tor IS dyer. Mr.. Mel claims
damsees for the imperfect dyeing blue, Of lao IDS
yarp by hlch $3.50 pieces oil the netting was dau
seed the blue stripe inserted In the goods from the
warn in question having faded wholly or 10 part out
In the bleaching, whereas the color should hsve
been fast, &e. BE brings action to recover aoous
10 cents d. piece, being the deterioration. For De,
Tense il was said that Mr. I. is good DYER ana
executed the work Ia ibis case well as usual
n
strong alkAlis and other bleaching material, and
that the injury in thiS case arose from die bad
quality and dark color Of the wool the goods were
made FROM which required stronger process Ia
bleaching white than the blue stripe could stand,
&c To be continued this forenoon. For plaintn
James b. Shey, Esq. For defendant Mr. NC
Adam.
Before Judge Paihe.-Johs ". Taylor Va. Je.ne'
Mofkers and Dennis Harris 10 recover OF tue
sssieness of Harris x Ocherhsusen, sugar rehners'
the value Of note. Defense TIA, suit on the same
note had been entered by Mr. I. against The ma
hers in this Court, and was not disposed Oh "neh
this suit was commenced, anu therefore TINS SUI
against the assignees cannot be maintained:
In reply Mr. T. stated that after entering the sal'
egaD.t the mai ers defense cf usury was put ~ ,
that be subsequently learned tina. the makers nAi
assigned and placed funds in the hands Oh Tue As
signees to pay this and other debts; tnat ne WIN
DIRE the salt against the makers, pAd tne coss'
and commenced this, the assignees refusing " seE
tie except on a compromise, the same rs WIN o'nsi
creditors, for 20 per cent The defendants nos PuE
ting in seasonabiy reply rs 70 the merits 'aueo
Campbell made order prohibiting thsn sessu9
up plea Of usury to this second suit A. 10 eonS. I
ed by defendants counsel that the proceeuinos .sr
be order were Irregular Verdict ior P~i" r.
-. 33l. subject 10 TIE opinion of the Coart-rNs
plaintiff, Mr.. T. in person for deienda'ts'
Tomlnson and w alden.
Charles n. Huntington va. Myer y. myers
Assault s.d battery. Mr. II. 10 broker IN I" AIr
81 and Mr. NJ OF the firm Of J. Haddon 20: Mel,
chant tailars, 1854 Broadway. MI IL oells ~ ~
,t,re one morning IN November las,, some Vote e
cccurred a. TO a Iofe OF n third party 'o' 800 800
which had been protested the day before anu Nu."
;.wss elledsed by Mr. NJ that Mr. "A. had gas'a"-