New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-02-07


property in Nsuvoo, Illinois, for It said propersS.
much Of IT, being Improved and unincumbored wor,H
$l9750. That complainant wished for time 20 20 or
send TO Nauvoo to ascertain for himself the charge
Ter OF The property IN question, but sas restrained
nom doing so By said PIegou and Westofook, who
stated t6at they had been detained and were desf-
Gus 10 close the matter up forth With Tney gave
amoavit as 10 te property, and also showed csrti6
Cate from the County Clerk at Nauyoo that he had
searched and HE property free from judgment
OF inoItsages That said Wesiorook SAID he was
single man and unmarried, &c. Taag complas0aat
p eisS, asieeSoy 10 Arrangement 20 toe SAID
fiegoi deeos OF The property IN YoDkers and OF asr
places aiiu. 60 "a, belonging 10 comp aInant That
tie original UNDERSTANDING that me SAD Pi,g,tt
and W, ~ addition 70 the Naayoo prooey,v acre "a
give complainant 81 geo IN money bun n was sa,d
ster~sTa 10 be movement To raise H. aad Complain
ant took, instead, three bonds and mortgages Of
$1,000 On u e properly conveyed by him Al Nes-
Brunswick, n J. Tina. the SAID Piggo,t executed
complainant deeos OF the property at Nauvoo, ex-
eept portion ALLEGED u have been worth - SEQ.
conveyed by said WestbTook.
Complainant further AYERS that he has since ascer-
tanned That the Ssld property al Nauvoo instead of
being worth $3.50, Is not worth over el,l5o or
2UU thai the title OF SAID w and Z. TO II Is eouot-
full and the property Rcumoered He alss states that
P1goII has conveyed, since getting the deed from
complainant. one quarter OF the farm at fonkers 70
defendant and conveyed the other three quarters
to Thomas Culoertson, OF Philadelphia, who con-
'syed said three quarters also TO defendant and
complainant mas reason 10 believe the consideration
alleged 10 have been paid by defendant, TO be hcti-
tous and exaggerated. ana that defend ant some
way connecieG Ia business with Piglott and West
bIook-aLd that CulbersOn and defendant both
knew OF bis nesotation with r. AMI w. and also
lhaI mp.ainaAt has been unable 10 mad plggot In
taiS Stale since-ihal defendant, has not used the
property so conveyed 10 him, and the title to the
term s,ll III Leese-that ant has offered
return ihe eds and bonds ana mortgages, and re.
convey the property IN Na0voo, Sc Tie says that IL
was combination, the result of general scheme,
and asks that the convey dnces made by aim DO de-
claTed absolutely yold and of no effect and that the
Count Will compel defendant 10 convey back TO HIN
the said farm, and that II necessary receiver be APP
pointed To tSke charge OF u.
In defense, Mr. Leete denies that there was any
general scheme In relation TO The matter. He says
he purchased the farm, and gave good considera-
ton. 50 SEQ to Mr.. Pggcit, and $1,000 to Mr. Gull
befisOn subject 10 the mortgage, and that ne was an
honest purchaser also that he believes Mr. Piggott
paid good consideration for sa,d farm, &C., and u
has been conveyed.
and the mortgage by him can give no title as against
the plaintiff AS both were executed after the notice
Of order OF suit VAS fled IN the county where the
rds lie. The judgment creditor have no better
title than the judgment debtor. BY the complaint
ana accompanying slidavits II would appear that
gross fraud was pefpetIatod on the plaintiff The
defendant doe Rot ceny this, but simply alleges his
ignorance OF It. lie says IN general terms mat ne
was a purchaser for valuable consideration. and
that he paid $4,000 for one quarter OF the prop
eIiy, aLC $1,000 for The remaining threeQuar-
tors How ne paii this ne does not tell whether In
cash OF IN liquidation of old debt, or IN exchange
III which haL was only the nominal value or In dis
l..
The notion, therefore, for a ,eiyer for any sur
plus over and above the amount 10 be paid 10 the
uorgasor for principal and interest," and costs, must
be granted, with SO costs To ABIDE the event.
d. II Lechtsnstsen agt. Lydia Harkr-further
examination of defendant ordered, TO show what
family she has aud their age aad hers, and whether
they are dependent on her or not, and whether the
money was intended for the support oil the family,
and what It's amount, &c
SUPERIOR CouRT-Before Judge Oakley.
- Mary Ship1nan ast. John Lockard TO recover
damages against the then first mate Of the ship Bro
mer, for assault and battery In placing plaintiff In
irons aTe ady referred to-
The Court, in It's charge, referred to the evidence
that plaintiff, after refusing TO do duty as ste "ardess,
the Captain caused her 10 be confined TO her state
room, u here she made So mucn noise by knocking
on the BERTH &C. that the Captain ordered the mate
~ handcuf her but that he placed the irons on her
wrists so loosely that she got them or and thfew
them overheard On one side 1t vas said no par
trcuar violence was used on the part OF tho mate
on the other that there was IL was also denied ON
Part OF plaintiff that she as ste Sardess, buI waiting
maid 10 the Captains ady-while for defense II Was
commended thar she was stewardess-her name, ~
her marx, appearing on the crew list To tnas erect
The Court charged that the mate Is not hsoles
should the lry consider that plaintl vas steward
ess npess he useo force In p acins irons upon
her than necessary II she did no, snip as stew
ardegs but was on board as waiting maid, then the
Captain had no right to put IRONS on her, and the
mate had DO right to obey his orders. Verdict for
plain,If, $3.50
CouRT OF GENERAL SEssIONs-Friday-
BEFORE the Recorder and Aid Tweed and Compton.
Trial Ter Abduction Bridget McCarty was placed
on trial, charged with having feonlousiy enticed ana
takena away one f len Cable from the house OF her
parents TOR the purpose o. prosii,utiDg her, Tho
complainant was examined at length, and In her
cross a. nation admitted that she knew that the
defenGant, is her aunt. Kept girls OF depraved
character al her house at the time she went 10 live
there. Mrs. Cable, the mother of the girl. was
then placed on the stand, and IN her cross examt
Dauon admitted that her daughter went to live
with the accused with her consent. When these
facts came light the proceeding officer said that
be considered II his duty TO abandon the case under
the CIRCUMSTANCES It was eyiden. that no abduc-
zion had taken place The Jury then, BY direction
OF the Court rendered verdict OF not guilty, and Ne
piifoBeT discharged.
Officer w IL Stephens brought into Court on
bench warrant, Andres L Toms and Enoch Cook
who stand injected for forgery, IN having passed
large number of IS counterfeit bills on the state
BARK OF Hartford, Conn. They were committed for
tfial. The Count then adjourned for the day.
SUPREME CougT Admissions TO The Bar.
The following gentlemen. in addition to those ale
reaoy mentioned, have been admisIed TO practice;
Ctas Budsal Isaac WhoreDdyke. Joseph L.
Sscke,t John b. Coles, Jr Francis X. Rives.