Daily evening star. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1852-1854, 1853-10-08
nAILY EVENING STAR.
city IT EN- s I.

.Hs Eco CGscs.-Thrsc cases, on which
wa. heard on Thursday before Justice
,,err Yesterday discussed before the same
' ,o commencing at one O'Clock and closing
"'- three. MIR. Harrington opened the debate
r,rv ingenious speech, 10 which Col. Thompson
Id with lot, of law, showing that Mr.. Hunter
,,.,ifiabIe in what he did. Mr.. Darlington also
-. m the srmc side, Conforming the course OF
" .,,ac who, he thought, injured the temper
~ $50 bv la, violence. although honest, and, IN
.;,s,,pce received just what h" deserved Mr..
,,.-,,,,,on closed with an able review OF both the
tcs of his opponents, defending his friend
..,he old man eloquent" on rum, and arguing
,,,,,,c, var certainly responsible 10 the law for
IN, che crc, in the face OF Mr.. Savage, which
-...,,s1 an assault, the same as if stones bad
,., THROWN, and, perhaps, worse, as the egS' were
...r and. therefore, the assault mme filthy The
--,.,,,,c decided with him, and held MIR. Hunter
I'm 100 for Court which was promptly gwen,
,, :, BoyIc entering on the same, and the other
-, v..re dismissed. The office was crowd
I,,c the discussion with anxious listeners, tenn
--.,.c u,n. tavern keepers, Sc, and number OF
F,uAs,. of the bar were present, paving much at
-, 70 ,be interesting, and, IN many respects,
Gin, debate. Thus closes for the present the
S,,,,. cases vs.. Hunter, Harvey, Horner, Fenwick
and FlemmIng
,r.,,ke occasi0n TO remark, IN this connection,
H., ~ long as our lawslegaIize the business IN which
NJ Hunter IL engaged. and the Corporation receives
money from him. IN the shape OF license ices, II LII
hound 10 protect him and hs family from all kinds
=, assaults IT, IN failing TO protect our citizens III
-.,,,r, nusances and thcv take the law IN their
-, hand. they are not much to blame. Let the
,,.cu,ioners Of the laws do their duty then we can
u,,n,.b ,I,o.- who violate them with good grace
The Boxers Of " GShinston ~. .4crnnfTiH-Aq ncs-
, was asked in the Star few days ago, the point
of which was =. Why do the bakers of Washington
furnish Us with loavcs of bread Of only half the SIZE
furnished to our ne.hbor, Of Alexandria, and charge
within one cent of the same they do" we nave
mad, inquiry about the matter, and arc told, why
did not the gucsOner give the weight az well as the
,rice Ifthat had been done il would have made
III. matter clearer hut they say it is not true, and IL
not reasonable that could be that twice the weight
Of bread IL given for six cents i'll Alexandria as Is
,ven here for five cents. The old feudal law Of Ie
slstory saying what shall h. the profits Of the me-
cbanc still exists in Alexandria, where bread is sold
by the pound, according to law. Here the Corpora
non have opened the business 10 competition, by
abolishnr the law, which has had the effect of
breaking down the monopoly of a few who had The
business in their hands, and who have quit the trade
recently because nothing could be made al il, under
the circumstances. The bread consumer, says our
Informant should enquire 90 who makes the money,
now ~ and saws is those who vendors of bread,
and stand between the bakers and the public. They
have created competition between the bakers, 80
get their bread cheaper, and make more on the
sale Of IT, and when the former sells to them Il
or Is ounces of bread for per loaf with -four
at 81 per barrel they seI for cents and the bakers
are held responsible to the public, which they think
Is not fair. There ten bakers in Washington now
the that was here four years ago, all owing to
the business being open TO competition, and
Of them il getting rich. The fact is. they say that
instead OF making money the business, the profits
small that many have recently quit the trade.
So much for the staff of life, to-day.