The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-11-14

The decision Of referee upon facts win lot Be de
his conclusion was clearly against the weight Of evil
| dence Judgment affirmed with costs
karkse AldricA Conditional evidence taken in a
suit in which Of the plaintiffs had died. Is
theless available at the trial The suit not abang by
the death Of party il only necessary to suggest the
death upon the record and substitute the representa-
tiyes OF the deceased. tits st the suit An
interrupted or continued absence of witness from the
time Of taking the testimony condtionay to the time Of
trial. IL not necessary II Is sufficient to show that at
the time o. the trial the witness absent from the state
and that hs attendance cannot be procured Judgment
Pringle rs Chambers.-where there are erasures or
nerlineations any material alterations appearing
upon the face Of an instrument IT becomes question Of
fact for the jury and not question for the court to
determine whether they ade before after
eution Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Bridal rs Ner Jersey Railroad and Transportation
tomPany-where two companies divide profits and
ares, and furnish cars and crates and servants for
and an action susainable against of the compa
MES for an injury occasoned by the negligence Of the
servants employed By either Of them in the business Of
Lane IS. Bedm.-The plaintiff having purposeiy, and
not by mistake, commenced his action on contract
and sued out an attachment, which discharged on
the defendant giving undertaking with suretlcs will
not be allowed to change his action to in tort Or
der affirmed with costs.
Marks Bdrd-The plaintiff having moved at the
trial OF the cause to strike out the of defend
ants described in his complaint joint contractors with
Judgment affirmed, With costs.
Chodbourne RS. acknowledgement affirmed, with costs.
on plaintiff remttlng SIS IL, with interest Tho excep-
ton OF the defendant to the Judges charge
broad to draw his attention to that small error and il
must therefore, be dsregarded this the sole
Gdscogne Strong The defendent gave his endorse
nent or acceptance TO the plaintiff his assgnor
agreement by the assgnor to deliver a certain Mt
Of wire TO third party, at certain prices; much
was delivered as equal 10 the amount of the note
acceptance given The defendant cannot be allowed
recoupe damage sustained by the third par BY the
ed. with costs
y.
the loss on certain sum of money, with a clause tina
all dividends from the estate of another then deceased
should come in deduction from the sum; the plaintif
must prove armatvely what the personal Of the
deceased produced is not enough to show what dvi
dcnds certain creditors received. Judgment the de-
PENDANT, with costs.
Weed IS. Pendleon.-The defendant having led the
plaintiff to believe that the plaintiff had three valid judg
ments against him on three notes and that SUPPOSE
ton to satisfy two OF the judgments with the belief that
the third would remain valid the court will satisfy
the third Judgment although it was for the
II the debt secured by all three of the notes paid in
fact. Order affirmed with costs.
Voorhis rs Barter and Executor Of ChiIds-In an
tion contract made by several persons of whom
is dead it ia improper to join the executors of the de-
ceased partner with the survivors, unless the complaint
shows some peculiar equity for joining them. The
objection be raised by the executors by demurrer
as no cause Of action is shown against them Judgment
Pirnie Purdy d Vdrtdn.-On construction OF will
Mrs. Varian is entitled 10 share in the resiuary estate
ass legaee with other legatees. Judgment to BE- modi
Seaboard and Roanoke Railroad Co rs. Ward-De-
endant set up counter claim and before the time for
replying expired the plaintiff entered exparte order
dismssing his complaint. The special term refused to
vacate that order and the OF special term was
affirmed. 1t would be different after the time to reply
the counter claim had expired. Ordor affirmed with
costs.
Harrison Benaers, Gc.-whether or not there can
be partnership for all purposes in the buying and sell
ing Of lands, to affect dormant partner Such
person will be LIABLE partner for rendered
by clerk in the purposes Of the joint business. Judg
ment affirmed with costs.
Hon. Judges Mitchell Q J.) aud Cerke presiding.
TIE PUTNAM DIVORCE CASE.
NOV. l3-Hdry Ann Putnam, appellant, Us. Theodore
E. Putnam, Kesponden-A suit for divorce in this case
on the ground of nfdety tried before Judge Roose
welt in April 1852 The complaint set forth the crcum
stances OF the charge, anticipating and replying to the
custody Of Theodore Alburtis Putnam the only living
child OF the marriage, who born the 18th Of May
1874. The defendant trial denied infdeity and set
up combination. The plaintiff put in special reply
The jury under the charge of Judge Roosevelt found
the defendant not proven guilty adultery to their salts
iacton but guilty OF gross mproprety towards his wife
and child and further certited'We recommend to the
Court to order the child to remain in custody his
mother" Tie plaintiff took bill of exceptions the
following ponts-lhat the charge gave undue force to
the plaintiffs doubt whether she could establish
the guilt of the defendant by proof which
would satisfy court and jury, and that
the evidence in favor of the general character
Of the particeps, not admissible. That it was an
error to inform the jury that the defendant had denied
his guilt on oath, and that trial should be warled
unless the Court wi upon the peadings ami proofs
they stand and the verdict decree to the plaintiff sep
Ihe Defendant 6ppJefsw with the custody Of her chilli
character of the lady with whom the adultery
charged. That the exceptions to the charge not
questions of law but for comments the testimony,
such ss the Judge ought no make Decision reserved