The Lambertville press. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1858-1???, 1861-04-10

tombe said he guessed he could, aud
stepped over to the store of the de-
PENDANTS, and asked Mr., BoemaH, one
of the partners, if he would sign that
note. Boeman looked at the note,
and asked who Van SICKLE was. Hol-
Holcombe replied that he was rich
man, who lived in the neighborhood
of Milford, and said to Boeman, You
need not be afraid to endorse it; we
will both have to break before we can
come on you for it, as it is payable to
John Van Syckle's order" Boeman
then endorsed the name of VIM. E.
Anderson Il Co., on the note, and
Holcombe then took it to the plain
tiff. None of the other partners were
present when the endorsement was
made.
The plaintiff then rested, where
upon Mr. B Vansyckel, the counsel for
defendants, moved to non-suit the
plaintiff, upon two grounds
Ftrst-Bsoause one partner cannot by his
individual act, bind the firm as the guarantor
of another or as party to note made for the
accommodation of another without authority
specially given to him for that purpose by his
co. partners and that it did not appear from
the evidence in the cause that Boeman had
such authority.
iSeond-Because the signature of VIM E.
Anderson & Co., endorsed on the back Of the
note before its endorsement by John Vansyckel
the payer, created psr Sc no implied or COM
mercial contract whatever, and could only sub.
iect VIM. E. Anderson 4 Co., to the liabilities
ola second endorser in case Vansyckel had en-
dorsed it to bona tfde holder for valuable con-
sideration.
After the argument of counsel, the
Court decided that the plaintiff must
be noD-suited upon both points taken
by Mr. Vansyckel. the Counsel for de-
PENDANTS, and dismissed the case
On Saturday morning, the case of
VIM Merrill vs Edward Galloway was
taken up Mr. Van Fleet for plain
tiff, ard Mr. Allen for defendant.
The suit was brought by the plain
tiff against t. e defendant to recover
damages. 1t appears from the evil
dence that Galloway was in The en-
ploy of Merrill. and engaged in sell
ing patent pumps, principally in Som
erset County the defendant sold
pumps to a great many persons, and
had collected some 1858 according to
the evidence of the plaintiff, which he
never bad accounted for to him
When Mr. Merrill called upon the de-
endant he refused to settle subse-
quently he gave him some satisfaction
as to what had been collected, &c.
The defendant ted the plaintiff that
there was no law in the State to COM
pei him to pay over the money
The case was Bummed up, the de-
fence being decidedly weak, and given
to the jury, who rendered verdict Of
5000 for the plaintiff.
The next case called was that of
Risler & Hoe, enherry Vi. Elisha War;
ford. Messrs Vansyckel and Allen
for defendant, and Messrs, Van Fleet
II Richie for plaintiffs.
This action was brought against
Elisha Warford by Messrs. Risler Il
Hockenberry, for the purpose oil col
Letting store bill amounting to about
1920, the goods having been pur-
chased by the wife of defendant lie
thinks that many of the things were
unnecessary, and refused to pay this
numbering bill on that ground.
The case was still on when the
Court adjourned, at two O'Clock for
the day,
The Circuit Court adjourned to
meet on Tuesday morning next at ten
o'clock. The Court adjourned until
Tuesday morning in order TO allow
those having business at town-meet
ing to attend to it, Monday being
general town meeting day.
The regular panel of jurors being
called on Saturday morning, several
gentlemen were absent. Judge Whelp-
ly fined the absentees five dollars each,
except few who went away by per-
mission.