The Lambertville press. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1858-1???, 1861-09-18

dance on Court during last week has not leen
as great as during the previous week, owl 9g,
doubtless, to the cause that the trial then en-.
and which occupied q week, was of such cha r.
acter as to make it quite certain that no othei.
case would be called up Business has pro-
crossed very owly, one cause having occupied
the exclusive attention of the Court, with the
exception of an argument in the Equity side of
tee Court on a foreclosure suit
The following persons indicted at the present
term, were brought before the Court and charg
ed on their indictments
James E. Brown, on five indictments for pass
ing counterfeit money Plead guilty to all.
and was sentenced to five years hard labor in
the State Prison.
Henry Maths, on two indictments for pas
sing counterfeit money. Plead guilty, and sen
fenced to four years hard labor in the State
Prison.
John F. Crammer, indicted for fornication.
Plead not guilty.
Prime Moore negro, for assault and battery.
Plead "not guilty.
James Clark, for assault and battery. Plead
not guilty"
Jacob Veit, indicted for grand larceny. Plead
guilty"
Elisha Yawger, indicted for fornication.
Plea" no 70 cult cOo:en2re.''
The following list of appeals, tried before q
Justice, without the Intervention of Jury.
and set down for trial at this term, are to be
tried at a special term, on the 10th of October
next
Pidcock VS. Cadfeld. Debt.
Smith VS. Van Doren. . -Voorhees.
Field VS. Room . Voerhees-San-
derson
Apgar VS. Hoagland, to use of Hall. Debt
Voorhees,.
Hurley vs. Jago. Debt.
Farley VS. Hockenbury. Debt. - San
derson.
Voorhees, VS. Van Derveer. ." Wyckoff-
Voorhees,
HOFFMAN VS. Robertson. Debt
Hsnnesy VS. Barry Debt.
The cause on trial when we went to press
last week was that of Patrick Daily vs. Peter c.
Bloom. The nature of the case was set forth
in our last issue. The Jury were out but a
short time, and returned a verdict for the plain.
tiff for S435. For plaintiff, VIM. VOORHEES,
and A. G. Richey; for def't Allen and Van
SyckeI
The next cause brought on for trial was q
suit of Ejectment, brought by benjamin Wool
verton plaintiff, against Oliver W Farley de.
PENDANT The plaintiff, Woolverton, claimed
tit e to the one-eighth of the one-seyenth mart
oil farm in the possession of Oliver W. Farley,
as devised under the will of his grand. father.
Joshua Farley, deceased. Joshua Farley, the
testator, by his last will and testament devised
certain specified lots of land for the payment
OF his debts, and if they should be insufficient
then he empowered his exectut ors to sell so
much of the east end of his farm as should be
necessary to pay off the remaining indepted-
ness. The lots were sold, and the money real
ized was not sufficient to pay all the debts
The farm was then resorted to to make up the
balance. Joshua Farley, by his will, devised
the whole of this farm Tor so much of it as
should be left, if it became necessary to sell
off the east end to lis widow and sixteen chill
dren, Ito be divided into seventeen lois and
each to share alike) for and during their nat
ural lves and after the decease of anv child or
children his or her share to go to his or her chill
dren. The executor advertised the farm. and
at the sale, the children of Joshua Farley decd
by public proclamation, desired the people not
to bid, as the will of their father was preiudi-
cial to their interests, and that the executor if
unable to sell the east end of the farm to nav
the debts, would be compelled to sell all. that
the children would buy it, and that they would
then Immediately set it up at public SALE No
persons bid, and the whole was sold to Charles
Woolverton, for about 81 200. This was done
in order to defeat the entail, and thus cut off
the estate of the grandchildren. The farp
was then put up at public sale and sold to OIL
yer W Farley. the defendant for upwards Of
$4,000, which sum, after paying off the D ebts.
was divided among the children of Joshua Far.
ley decd Barbara Woolverton, the 1ootbar
OF the plaintiff, and one of the chi dren of
Joshua Farley, deed, having died, til a nlaitif
ner son. comes into Court and claim his mart
OF the farm, rs devised under said will rha
defendants claim to have conn ,lata t;tla h.,
virtue of the executors sale, anf the colo nod
subsequently to the defendar /. The Cont
held that the executor had no nowar - sal, tha