The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-02-25
Common Pleas.


before non Juuke Noouruus
SUIT FOR ALLEGED ASSAULT ASp BATTERY At THs
BROADWAY THsArRE-IxroRTAST TO MANAGERS
ASD sPEoULAToRs ~ TIcEETs
FED. Il -,roseph S,dgriIi o, Wo0.y Poitee OGcer.-
This action for alleged assault aud battery II
will be recollscted that during the mouth Of March Last
Nr. Edwin Forrest peffor ming one Of his engage
mens at ,he Broadway theatre snd a. usual there
great rush for seats, which generally euya ed
three day IN advance. knowing the anxiety on the
part OF the public to witness the peforms,sss Of the
great fsvoTite trsgedan, certain persons conmsnrei
specializing in tickets purchased number Of reserYsd
seats and then sold them AZ night at the doSrs chars
ing an eNorbltsnt premium Ibis fact having 5een s..
certsned by the lessee the assistant treasurer Mr.
Nssle refused 20 seats 10 advance To persons
whom lie suspected to be spectators; bst he was
more than one occasion out~ttsd by tbs parties sending
messengers TO seats for Mr. 20 .nd So The PUB
lie we're cautioned, by large pacards, against pur.
chasing tickets from outsiders a. they frequently
cold seats for night that we're engaged
for another and this led 10 great confusion 10 the house
The defendant, who one Of the detailed police on
GERS Of the theatre seeing the plain ia (sr -e.grsD
aecosting ladies and gentlemen who entering the
house and selling them ticte.s-whrh was expressly
prohibited By order Of the GENE ngly
PEELED the pl,intid from the Of the theatre
alteration epsusd and the plaintiff was taken 70 the
police station where Mr. Aaee the sfsst.nt treasurer
sencsc snd by hts presence san touci the acton Of
the officer.
The plaintiff subsequently CONNIE gc.d suit against
Mr. maggie and Mr.. Wooey for assault and false impr
emit laying bis damages 1T 81 10 each case Tue
init against Magic vas however abandoned, aud the
present action s brought against ths oicer for o. 600
Mr. b. BJ rne, on behalf Of sssgrist called witness
Who proved the simple tact that the plan,n f3rci
bly, erpslled from the vesbule 81 the theatre
night 10 March, 1854 when Mr. Forrest PERFORMING
Of his successful engagements. The witness knew
nothing OF the origin OF the the FOR
Interference o. III. Officer I'D he know Who the OIL
Til. was the whole Of he plsntin' case
NJ. Carr fof the hrm OF Whitiog CLARK h ReIe FOR
the defendant, called no witness bat sssei for
suit, which the Court Immediately granted
before Hon Judge Woodruff and jury.
I'm 2e-oI A1,n n. francis Jordan -rh' an
action brought 10 for bill % goods sofa The
credit Of the defendant, but delivered TO vessel
tyne. The parties who .oll G. G Dole 4 60. TIE
firm dissolved snd the business rsmtinsl on settle
nent wish the plaintiff. Dole The question ~ whom
tie credit givenWessslstyne Jordan The jury
found verdict for pian,ih for anoupt Ella med u
Acaahon for plaintiff, hr Angus for dstenlAnt
Before Hon Judge ingrshAm
I'm 20 g. q, Die n 90, 70. PADiD q. Martin -Th.
was an acton . proms ory note for $40, mAis by
defendant md sne 20 one hcCartney The defoncs
set d that the note mate In pursuance .! an
agreement that 20 be o. avail valid "
less NeCartuey did some work the Walton Hou.s
which 10 was alleged not done. and therefore n.
note was no. valid and that the defendants we're no.
bora fde holder. for value. To this point the eyisnes
was conflicting sni various legal Authorities
sorted 10 and commented on BY both parties; bat the
Court rendered verdict for plaintiff for ella
and interest Mr.. y, Mcmahon for plaintiff Jones md
Lawrence Tor defendants
aro~.r~. Tc~r-<.swsr~i Tea