The daily press. (Cincinnati [Ohio) 1859-1859, 1859-03-10
LAW REPORT.
COMMON PLEAS.


QUESTION OF Practice - AMENDMENT OF
AFF1DAvITs.--Snyder and Jenkins rs. j. Kauf-
mani Cobb and Arnold us. the same. This was |
an action, submitted to Judge Dickson, to re-
cover for hogs, sold by plaintiffs to defendant.
An order of arrest was sued out against the |
defendant, on the ground that he had fraudu- |
lontly disposed of his property. motion was
made to vacate this order, on the ground that
the affidavit on which it was based was veri-
fed before q notary public. Pending tho hear
ing, plaintiffs Cobb and Arnold) filed new
affidavit verified before the Clerk of this Court,
had q new order of arrest issued, and filed
new bond. This was done during the life Of
the first order, and while defendant was in
custody under it.
The Court said there could not be two orders
of arrest, compelling defendant to give two
bonds. The question was as to which should
be dismissed. The defendant presents no OBJ
lection to the dismissal of the first order, and
the Court, adopting the views of Judge Ghol-
son, in n well-considered opinion that where q
| party has defendant under arrest by reason
of an illegal order, he can not legally re-arrest
him-the Court should hold that the second
| order of arrest must be discharged.
In the case of Snyder and jenkins against
| the same defendant, n motion was made to va
| cate the order on two grounds the first that the
affidavit on which it is based, is styled Of the
| Superior COurt-the petition and the order OF
| orrost ;taoIf oro etvIad of tho Cannon Pleas
| Tho son,o oIorl, & Tho cIerL of both Courts
tH, ne saiao G,oIN - 'no Oi?nN SmSforJ DCr ss9
ID N rrncssodcd 20 reyoar,, tbot in his onin,
;or IT, ,Po0 = Sofoot hora In tho ofidav;t II
,Un, bovovor marc mistote, and The nues-
t;on wos whetber an afidavit conld he
| on,ordo5 TT Tho not;t;on could ba amended.
1vhv nnt tho nxiiiorvS Tho Court was Of
on;I;or thot ,b;s was a nroceed;ng embraced
I;tb;n tbe n,,rviev of section 137 of the Code
and that so far as a mistake. and in further.
ancc of ;nstice. IL might he amended. Whethe,
n could be amended rs to the substance of the
afiJavit denended on other considerations
hnt claayIv In a matter of mistake the Cour
wouid allow an amendment. bv the fling of /
now afidovit Iilro the former in all respect
awoo,,t tba t;tjs 'H - - -
% a. ,aor;.s of tbo oosa tho nurchase n
tbeso hoes (aome S1 30O worth \ was made will
} yrorn;se " nav in n verv short time: tbi
, nrprUiso was poi comnl;ed With. The defend
, ant alleged that rumor having gone abroad
tbot he yas insoIvent. his creditors presse,
him bnt ba onIv sbowed that he made nav
Q mentto his fathcr-in-law of debtno yet duo
SEnn Lo LaJ not accounted for at all. Tb
crOnO,rs;on Of tbe Court tberefore. was tha
tbo nortv had fraudulentlv contracted the debt
: and tboy should refuse the motion, therefore
i 70 vocate the arrest.
Dodd and Huston and Mr.. Brewer represent
al nIa;nt;ffs St,IIo Andrews a McCook th
n defensc. Ft |.'l N't.
=, P,y1xc TurArRIcAI LICENSES UNDER Pro
rRsT.-Lewis Baker rs. the City-Geo. Woo
~. the same-Smith a Nixon rs. the sam,
! Two of tha deSsndonts we're interested in ca,
!. rv;ng on theatrical nerformances-the othe,
were nronrietors of a concert room. Thew ter
10 Jered 70 The Mavor S1 each. the expense
rs making out license. The Mayor demande
= of each S6l or $40 in accordance with an ord