The miners' express. (Dubuque, Iowa) 1849-1854, 1853-04-27

No. 25 do VI. B. Spencer; do do
; No. 90 do v.p O'Connor; do do
; No. 80 do v.G w Starr; do do
No. 33 do VA Yager; do do
; No. "a do v. Charles Rose; do do
4 No. 36 do John Kries; do do
}, No. SO do v. F Shumaker; do~~ do
j No. al do v.X Reinfreid, do do
j No. AZ do v.CDesmoineaux;do do
j No. As do VT Murphy, do. do
These who plead guilty Of selling liquor by
the dram were fined from ten to ninety dollars
each and costs according to the length of time
they had been selling. Most of them, ifnot all
represented to the Court that they had quit or
would Immediately quit the traffic.
No. 16 State of Iowa v. Edwin Steele; keep.
ing gambling house; plea not guilty; jury unable
to agree and discharged.
No. II State of Iowa v. William Bucknam
and George G Banghart; selling liquor by the
dram; plea not guilty; verdict not guilty; defen
dant discharged
No. 1S State oflowa v. William Hall; same
as No. IL.
No. % State of Iowa v. John Shaffner; SELF
ing liquor by the dram; demurrer to indictment;
demurrer overruled as to first count and sustain.
ed as to second defendant fined ninety dollars
and costs.
| No, 26 State of Iowa v. J B Spencer; keep
ing gambling house; plea not guilty; case con-
tinued.
| No. 27 State of Iowa v. s B Spencer; keep
ing house of i'll fame; nolle prosequi entered.
No. 35 State of Iowa " Antony Heeb; SELL
ing liquor by the dram; demurrer to Indictment;
demurrer overruled; defendant fined Is dollars
and costs
| No. 43 State of Iowa " William Zumhoff;
same as No. IS except that defendant was fined
800.
| No. "A State of Iowa v. Frank and Loromis
Duff; same as No. 35 except that defendant was
fined $50.
No. 81 State of Iowa v. Peter Kiene; selling
| liquor by the dram; the prosecution had no evi-
dence that defendant sold during the time stated
in the indictment, which time was laid on the
| lst of Jan. 1858 ,oith continuando, and after
argument as to whether OF not the time was ma
terial the court held that in such case it was,
and defendant was discharged.
In Nos. ], 2, a, 5, 6, 7, g, 10, the grand fury
found no bill, and defendants were discharged.
In Nos. 20, 81, 90. "a, %, 81, 80, 3s, 40 and
DC, bills found by grand jury but defendants not
found, and the cases continued
civil pocRrT
No. Lyman & Shomo, v. L. Clark and
J L Lyon. Continued.
Ne 2-Elen Corkery, admin trx, &c, Of P
Cookery, decd, v. B McGowan; venue chang
ed to Jackson county.
No 3-Bennelt s. Weld, Evans a. Wat
klns; assumpsit, continued.
No 6-Peter Kiene, v William Ruff; slander;
continued by plaintiff at his costs.
No flames F Chapman, Hiram Weld !;
ferry account, continued by consent
No civilian Emerson, M Stone and
VIM G Stewart; injunction to stop proceedings
on execution of judgment that was confessed
by attorneys; facts and questions of law sub.
mtted to the Court
No 10-Samuel Lewis, Stillman Elwell,
Isaac Burge, and a J Ritter suit on a note
Judgment against Isaac Burge, an endorser, for
$3.50, which is half the amount of the note.
No ll-William Ruff, Peter Kiene (; libel,
confined by plaintiff at his costs.
No 12-John McGrevery, James Tanning
and Morgan Curran; partition; continued for
report Of commissioners
No l3-Timothy Davis, v John Mcguire ct al
petition for instructions in distributing trust
funds; continued.
No 14-Catharine Luck, ad NIX, &c, of L P
Luck, ed, v DR. Franklin No 2 suit for dam.
ages for loss of fat boat and contents, which
the steamboat had in tow trial by the jury
verdict for plaintiff for $l53 80 judgment on
verdict.
No l5-William Joshua Barney, v. George
l. Nightingale suit on note given by defen-
dant for money due to Dubuque Lodge of Free
Masons it was argued that the Lodge was not
such body as could sue, and that Mr.. Barney
could not sue because he did not own the note,
but the Court ruled that the suit was rightly
brought under sections 1876 and 1877, of the
Code, for to hold otherwise would affect the
substantial rights Of the Lodge, which could
not sue in its own name; defendant took ex-
cep,ons; the jury found averdct for plain.
tiff for $43,a4, and judgment was entered on
the verdict.
No l6-Chris. Clark, Timothy Piper and
others; replevin continued at defendants
costs.
i No 17-Joseph Craig, Steamboat Lamar
tine; suit for damages caused by the negl-
gence of the officers and crew of the boat ju-
ry were unable to agree and discharged case
continued.
;. No l8-John Sheldon, v Elizabeth Sheldon
divorce; continued for publication.
No l9-W w. Coriell and wife, Matthia,
Ham to be submitted in vocation.
/ No 30 Same, Samuel B Munson and 9th
ers, same.
No 2l--Asa Walker, D NJ Walker, ac-
ton between father aud son about thei
accounts trial by jury verdict for defendan
for $1o3; motion for new trial pending.
No 26-Hiranl Weld, James Chapman
ferry accounts, continued.
No 27-M L HalloweIl & Co, Henry {
GaItrell and Ben N Samuels, assignee sub
!, mitted to Court on petition, answer & demurrer
No 2S- George Willging, Benedict Lutz
suit on bond defendant bound his son to Will
ging, and took him away again; submitted I
Court.
No Or A Il + II Smith v Duhuau
q County appeal from County Court on an ap
plieaton tor are opening ofsths proceedings
Il the Eagle Point Road this case was subnitte
70 the Court last term.