The true Democrat., 1856-05-06


 Arkansas - January Term, 1856, from
 7th March, until close of Term.
 No. 3-Mooney vs. Brinkley-appeal from Clark -C Chancery Reversed. Opinion per English, c. J.
 No 4-Abraham vs Wilkins-appea from Lafayette. Affirmed. Opinion per English, c.
 No. 9.-Nunn ct al. vs. Matlock-appeal from Onachita-Chancery. Affirmed. Opin- ion per Scott, J.
 No: 1s.-Bettison vs. Budd--appeal from Pulaski-reversed. Opinion per J ohnson sp.J. 1 No. 27.-Kowanachi vs. Askew, adm.-ap- peal from Columbia. Affirmed with 10 per cent damages. Opinion per Scott J.
 No. 3S.-Cummins vs. Rapley ct al.-appeal from Pulaski-Chancery Affirmed. Opinion per English, c. J.
 No. 46.-Wassel vs English ct al.-error to Pulaski Affirmed. Opinion per Johnson, SD. 1 No. 47.--Sutherland vs Seaborn-appeal from St. Francis. Affirmed. Opinion per John son, SD. J. No. 4S.-Bowman vs. Browning-appeal from St. Francis. Reversed. Opinion per Scott, J. No. 52. Lindsey vs. Wayland - appeal from Lawrence. Affirmed. Opinion per Eng fish, c. J.
 No. 33.-Wills, adm. vs. Fletcher, guard appeal from Pulaski. Reversed. Opinion per Scott, J.
 No. 55. l. Meadows vs Rodgers appeal from Clark. Affirmed Opinion per Eng fish, c. J.
 Mo- 63.--The State vs Chapin- error to Phillips. Affirmed. Opinionp per English, c. J.
 No. 0l.-Kinney ct al. vs. Heald-error to Sebastian Affirmed. Opinion per Hanly, j.
 No. 02.-Roberts ct al. vs Randolph-ap- peal from Desha. Affirmed. Opinion per English, c. J.
 No. S7.-Cornish adm. vs Keesee-error to Union. Affirmed. Opinion per English, c. J.
 No. 93.-Pke ct al. vs. Frazer ct al.-ap- peal from Monroe. Affirmed, with per cent damages. Opinion per Scott, J.
 No. 98.-State vs. Morrill-rule for con- tempt Rule discharged. Opinion per Eng fish, c. J.
 No. 99.-President and Directors Bank of Washington, ct al. vs. The State of Arkansas ct al.-appeal from Pulaski-Chancery. Af hrmed. Opinion per Scott, J.
 No. 100. President and Directors Bank of Washington, ct al. vs. The State of Arkansas ct al.-appeal from Pulaski-Chancery. Af- flrmed. Opinion per Scott, J.
 Mo- 1O0.-Memphis and St. Francis Plank Road Co vs. Sulivan-appeal from Crittenden Affirmed. Opinion per Scott, J. No. l14-Cincinnati & l.. R. Slate Co. vs Bridge & Shepherd-error to Pulaski Re. versed. Opinion per English, C. j. No. 118.-Keller vs. Vowell-apreal from Ponsett Reversed Opinion per Hanlv, J. No. 121.-Hicks ct al. vs. Badham, use, etc. appeal from Phillips. Affirmed. Opinion per Hany, J.
 Mo- 122--Taylor ct al vs. Coolidge ct al. appeal from Phillips. Reversed Opinion per Hanly, J.
 No. l24-The State vs. Williams ct al.- error to Independence. Affirmed. Opinion per Hanly, J.
 Mo- -Platenius, adm vs The State error to Pulaski. Affirmed. Opinion per Scott, J.
 No 129.-Platenius adm. vs. the state-er TOT to Pulaski. Affirmed. Opinion per Scott J. NO. l5O--beers, use, etc, vs. the State error to Pulaski Affirmed. Opinion per Scott, J.
 No. 132.-Wallace vs. Brown-appeal from Crawford. Reversed. Opinion per Hanly, J.
 No. 133.-Cannon ct al. vs the State-ap- peal from Yell. Affirmed. Opinion per Han ly J.
 No. 134-Biscoe ct al. surv. vs. Madden. admr.-error to Pope. Reversed Opinion per Scott, J.
 No. 135.-Biscoe ct al surv. vs. Madden. adm.-error to Pope. Reversed. Opinion per Scott, J.
 Mo- l36.--Biscoe ct al. surv. vs. Madden admr. error to Pope. Reversed Opinion per Scott, J.
 No. 138.--Oliver vs. the State-appeal from Scott. Reversed. Opinion per English, c. J.
 No. 1fl.--State vs. Johnson-appeal from Sebastian. Reversed. Opinion per Hamly J.
 No. l45.-- Crisc vs. Huev, auditor, etc. -appeal from Pulaski. Reversed Opinion per English, c. J.
 Mo- 146.-Redd vs. County of St. Francis -appeal from St. Francis. Affirmed. Opin- ion per Hanly, J.
 No. 140-Palmer use, etc. vs Hicks--ap- peal from Phillips Affirmed. Opinion per English, c. J.
 No. 149.-Mayers vs. Anspach ct al.--ap- peal from Sebastian. Affirmed Opinion per Hanly, J.
 No 152.--Hill vs. Steee--appeal from Johnson. Affirmed. Opinion per English c. J.
 No. 153.-Atkins vs. Hershly--appeal from Johnson Reversed. Opinion per llauley, :.
 No. 154.-Zachery vs. Brown ct aI-error to Johnson. Reversed. Opinion per English, c. J.
 No. 155.-Fowler vs. Keats, almr.-- ap- peal from Pulaski. Affirmed. Opinion Der Hanly, J.
 No. 157.-Stllwel vs Gray-appeal from Pulaski. Affirmed. Opinion per Hanly, J.
 No. 159.-Jones vs. Austn--appeal from Drew. Affirmed. Opinion per English c. J.
 No. 162.-Whte vs the State - appeal from Pope. Affirmed Opinion per Hanley, J.
 No. 168.--Houck ct al. vs. Lynch--ar peal from Crawford. Affirmed. Opinion per Han l y, J.
 No. 169:-sutton ct a vs. Hays--appeal from Craw ford. Reversed. Opinion per Han l y,J.
 No. 17O.-Dunnegan ct al. vs. Byers--ap- peal from Independence. Affirmed Opinion per English, c. J.
 No. 173.--Owen vs. Arlington ct al.-eror to Union. Affirmed Opinion per Scott J.
 No. 174.--Moss vs. the State-appeal from Prairie. Affirmed. Opinion per Hanly, J.
 No. 175.--Burr ct al. vs Sickles appeal from Independence. Affirmed. Opinion per Hanl y, J.
 No. 176. -Greenwood vs. State appeal from Poinsett. Reversed. Opinion per Han l ly, J.