The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-06-15
La w NTELLMENCE.

Milton Whitney, Esq, Attorney for the State, pro
scouting The following business occupied yester
day:
Charles Cannon, indicted for the larceny of
coat and pants from Jacob Heck & Co.; Charlie
Patrick alias Frederick, indicted for the larceny q
pair of ,gaiter boots from Henry Peck; Pete
Apples, indicted for the larceny of n watch from
Geo. F. Kraft, and Levi Chase and Daniel Hunt
parties cOored, indicted for the larceny of SlI
worth of skins from Daniel Darragh, were several
! ly arraigned and plead ''not guilty.
Charles Campbell, indicted for the larceny of Al
gallons of brandy from Green d Yoe, was arraign
ed and plead ''guty." He asked the Court to bc
merciful to him. Sentenced to the pententiarS
! for two years.
In the case of Charles Patrick alias Frederick
charged with the larceny of a pair of CATERS bail
was fixed at $500, but not given.
In the case of John Clark, indicted on the charge
OF violating the law in selling foreign lottery tick
cts, Messrs John Nelson, j. NJ Campbell and T.
NJ. Lanahan appeared and plead 'not guilty. for
their client.
The two first counts of the indictment charge
gaming generally; other counts charge violation OF
Acts of Assembly in selling foreign lottery tickets:
the violation of the articles of the constitution pro-
! hibiting lotteries, &c.
The defence declined taking jury, the questions
arising being altogether of legal character.
The State called Deputy Sheriff John s. Pointer
who testified that he knew John Clark's place of
business; he kept lottery office on Baltimore
street, between South and Holiday streets. TTick-
| ct in the Sussex county, Delaware, Lottery 1859
| shoWu.l ituesS DOu1Ht tnat ticket OF Clark;
paid 81 for it; bought it on the 2sth of Nav OF
Clark himself; has bought other tickets of Clark
An order IN the Sussex county, Delaware, Lottery,
on France, Broadbents d Co., for ticket, shown
Witness paid 81 for that order; Clark keeps place
open for the sale of tickets; has sign out of 'tck
cts for SALE
The State offered ne other testimony, and the de-
| fence had no testimony.
Mr.. Whitney said the indictment contained eight
counts-the two first being under the act of 1856,
ch. 1875, Furnishing the using or keeping of gamb-
! lingroom; and urged that the offence committed
! was covered by that act The third count is under
the acts of 1916, ch. l09, and of ls47 ch 2S4 and
charges the sale of foreign lottery tickets which is
prohibited in this State. The fourth count is un-
der s. ch. l29, of the act of 1928, prohibiting
| the offering for sale, or agreeing to SELL lottery
tickets of another State. The fifth count charges
at common law, violation of the fifth section of
the 9TH article OF the constitution which pro-
abts, after the first dav of April, 1852 the draw
ing of any lottery scheme, or the sale off any lottery
ticket IN this State. The 9th, 7th, and Sth counts
are under the act of 1927, ch. $50, which prohibits
the setting up of sign, notice, card devise, to
induce the people to believe that chances in pro-
| hibited lottery may be had, &C. The State con-
tended that the evidence sufficient to convict
the traverser under any, and ALL of the counts of
the indictment, and cited several authorities in
| support of this position.
Mr.. Lanahan replied for the traverser, and urged
that there could be no conviction under the first
two counts Of the indictment, as the act on which
they were framed did not apply to the sqle of lot
! terry tickets, but only to gambling. That the third
count was untenable, because the acts of Assembly
of lS4647 required the prosecution to be initiated
| by the lottery commissioners, which office has
ceased to exist. That the fourth count was bad
inasmuca as the act of $685. on which it is drawn
Is repealed by the act of 1916. In regard to the
| nth count 1t was contended that the Legislature
having failed to provide penalty, as required by
the constitution, and the act of lS46 not being re-
pealed, the traverser could not be punished under
the act OF 1916, and also for msdemeanor at COM
mon law for violating prohibition of the organic
law of the State. If the Legislature had intended
to punish parties for the sale of lottery tickets
| they would have provided the means. The sixth
seventh and eighth counts fully satisfied by
the act OF 1881, ch. 79-an act subsequent to that
| under which these counts were framed. The act
of 1881 makes it penalty of $50 for each and every
violation of said act
Court at fifteen minutes past two o'clock ad-
Journed. Messrs. Nelson and Campbell will speak
to-day.
SUPERIOR CoURT,-Hon. Z. Collins Lee, Judge
The following occupied the Court Yesterday:
John ID. Riddlemozer Louis Lohrfnk. Inqui-
sition for plaintiff for Sl25.
Harris and Page Richard W. Nelly Judg-
ment by default.
Assignment for to-day No. l to 25
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CoURT.-Hon. William
Fell Giles, Judge. The following business occu-
pied the Court yesterday:
United States Us: Edward English, indicted on
the charge of stealing a silver watch and some
silver coin from Andrew Olson, fellow-seaman of
the ship Alexander, on the high seas Verdict of
guilty. Sentenced to be imp prisoned one wear in
Jail.
CIRCUIT CoURT FOR BALTIMORE CIrY.-Hon. VIM.
George hrebs, Judge. The following occupied
the Court yesterday:
Catharine +. Lee and others rs. James H. Carter
and others. In the matter of the application for
the appointment of an associate trusteee Opinion
OF Court filed overruling the application.
CoURT OF COMMON PLEAs.-Hon. William L. Mar
shall, Judge. The following occupied the Court
yesterday:
Henry Gaehle rs. Ed. Duffy. An appeal from
Alexander. Verdict for appellee for Sl00.
Assignment for to-day 1872 to 1856.
CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CoUNTY.-Tow-
soNTowN, June IA, 1s59.-Before Hon. Judge Price
The case of tresspass which has been pending be-
fore the Court for the past eight days again re-
sumed to-day. This case, previously reported
is an action of trespass between DR.. Walter T. AL
lender VIM. Y. Day, for obstructing an old
Joppa road Mr.. Machen concluded the argument
on the admissibility of prayers offered after
which the Court delivered its decision, admitting
three prayers each side and rejecting the same
number, after which counsel retired to examine the
evidence as elected in the cause preparatory to
filing exceptions.
Tho Court also inetruntad fba ;up,r ~ rondo, -