Meigs County telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy [Ohio]) 1848-1859, 1858-06-01

| - OVuUe
The May term of the Court Of Common
Pleas for this County should have com
menced on Tuesday last. But in conse
quence of the, extraordinary floods, sue
ceeding the heavy rains Of the preceding
week, the Judge was not able to meet hi
nppointmentuntil Thursday. Under tn,
circumstances, with almost any other mai
than Mr.. Nash for Judge, the Court would
not have been held at ALL
The food iii Hooking rendered it i'm
possible to reach this place from Athens
where his Honor was holding Court the
previous weekly the ordinary mode o.
travel between the two points. The at.
tempt was then made to reach Marietta by
railroad from Athens, and thence by steam.
boat TO Pomeroy. But the r. R. was found
to be soOSs'ructed that the cars could run
but short distance from Athens. Foiled
in his attempt. with his characteristic en-
ergy, the Judge made his way over the
hills and "huckleberry knobs" of Athens
County, to the mouth Of Hooking, where
taking steamboat, he reached this place,
as before stated. on Thursday morning.
The attorneys from Athens, who started
with him, reached Pomeroy just. in time
to hear the sheriff adjourn Court on Fri
day night-the business of the term hav-
ing been disposed Of. 80.
For energy of character off the bench,
and faculty for dispatch Of business
when on, we can safely point to his Honor
rs model Common Pleas Judge.
The Hood, by sweeping away most of
the bridges in the County, and obstruct-
ing the highways, prevented the presence
of many Of tho parties 10 suits, and the
witnesses subpenaed to be in attendance,
for which cause many Of the cases we're
continued. A large amount Of ordinary
business, however, was Il Transacted during
.hc two days in which the Court WAS in
session.
There was ono cause disposed Of, which
is OF some interest fIom the peculiarly of
he case and the principle involved. 1t
vas the case OF the Commissioners of
deigs County against Michael Colon"
This was civilization brought under the
eyenthlS Section cf the celebrated Liquor
Jaw Of 1854, which reads thus: "That
very wife, child, parent, guardian, EN-.
'loyer, or other person, who shall be in
lred in person or property, or means OF
upport, by any intoxicated person, or in
onsequerce of the intoxication, habitual
r otherwise, of any person, such wife,
bid, parent. guardian. employer, or other
ersons shall have right of action in his
her own Lame, Ggdinstany person who
hall, 6y selling intoric4ttng liquors con
arg tot1is act. hare caysed tile intorica.
on Of such person, for oii damoges actu-
!iy sustained, &c." The facts of tho
use were these: The defendant sold
quor to two young men "who were in
70 habit Of getting intoxicated, I" and con
equcntly, contrary TO this act. The
oung men became intoxicated on the
quor SO sold, and getting into row,
ere arrested and placed in Jail, where, in
re frenzy caused by the drink, they broke
P the beds and other property in the Jail, :
s the property destroyed belonged to
70 County, suit was brought in the name
the Commissioners. against the de.eud- q
IT. who sold them the liquor, for dam u
70, under the above section Of the Liauor =
W. The case was originally tried before
co, Lee, Esq, and judgment rendered II
,ainst the defendant for the value Of thc f(
operty destroyed. An appeal wastaken u
the Court of Common Pleas, where an Il
ssue at law" was msde'up on the de- s
urrcr Of the defendant 10 the petition in d.
G case. The demurrer admitted .he al
cts as above set forth, but denied the 6
yht OF the, Commissioner" to sue, be- ol
use "lorporafions" are not named in pi
C act, among "perSony" TO whom III. Iw