Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1860-04-11

RooM No l--DEToRE JuDaE HoADLEY.-W,
O.. Smith vs. Merritt, Kempton 4 Co., and
Others Before this Court on demurrer TO
answer.
II is no defense to suit that an indorser
is unidentified by the maker. Demurrer sus-
tanned. ,,yr arT sd a1 10 .rrr
N, W. Thomas L Co. vs. Administrators of
W. r. Morris.-Demurrer to answer sus-
tanned.
S. L. Weston Us. The Western Baptist Ed
ucational Society, makers, and j. Decamp
and J. J.. Moore, indorser. r.--Action on two
promissory notes. The defense in the an
swer was want of notice. Answer de-
INJURED to.
Held: A third party whose name Is put on
note before delivery Is not an indorser,
but stands in the position of an original
maker, and notice is not necessary.
j. Q. Hall, assignee, Us. Higgins & Co. and
the Sheriff Of Hamilton County. An action
brought by the assignee of Henry Falls, who
claims that F. made an assignment to him
for the benefit of his creditors, before the
attachment issued at the suit of Higgins
& Co. against Falls, on the 18th of October.
UxFoRruxArE AFFRAY BETWEEN rwo
PROMINENT PHYsIcIANs-ALLoPATHY VERSUS
EcIEcTIcIsM.-0n Saturday, March 81, a
difficulty occurred onSeventh-street, between
Vine and Race, between Drs. o. z. Newton
and A. f. Heighway, in which the latter was
severely beaten, and injuredin such manner
as to be confined TO his room for several days.
A short time since warrant was issued at
the instance Of DR.. H., charging DR.. N. with
assault and battery, and the case came up for
trial yesterday in the Police Court.
The examination was not concluded when
the Court adjourned at six o'clock, and al
though fourteen or fifteen witnesses had been
examined, the prosecution had not yet gotten
through with its testimony. The circtm-
stances, so far as we could learn them from
the evidence elected before the jury; were
briefly these: --. .IU. Ttf
On the morning to which we have refer
red patient of DR.. Newton's tied his horse
to a tree-box in front of DR.. Heighway s
Office, Immediately adjoining that of DIR. n,
and passed into the house of his physician.
For some cause which does not appear, DIR.
II. unhitched the horse, left him standing in
the street, and then returned to his house
A short time afterward he found the horse
had a second time been tied before his door,
and II second time he unhitched the animal
AT thismoment Capt. James Newton, brother
to the physician, came out of DR.. MS house
apparently for the purpose of re-hitching the
horse. While these parties were talking Of
the affair DR.. Newton came upon the scene
and the fight took place.
AS we have already stated, the testimony
was not concluded when the Court adjourned
and the case promises to occupy its attention
during the greater portion of to-day. Hare
feelings seem TO have existed between the
belligerent parties for some time, which have
doubtless had their effect in bringing abou
this unfortunate rupture; but the case as il
stands, appears to us merely an attempt, OF
the one part, to provoke breach of th,
peace. which the other was equally willing
should take place.
Capt. James Newton and George l.. Whit
more, who seem to be in. some mysteriou
manner connected with the affair, were also
included in the charge, and both the parties
claim TO have acted in self-defense. The tes
timony for the defense will be heard to-day
and some new facts, in all probability, ELECTED
which we shall lay before our readers in ou
| next issue -