, 1863-07-31
1AW INTELLIGENCE.

ern times.
LAW INTELLIGENCE.
UNITED s1ArEs DISTRICT COURT, ron THE NoRrn.
EES DISTRICT OF ,11lNo1s-Bxfore tie Hon.
Thomas U7rhHN10Ad, Judge.
J.B. Ward, who has been in jail since January
1st, 1863 on charge Of having forged, and having
in his posseteion, forged vouchers upon the Uni
ted statea, pu1porting to be signed by Capt. ;. D.
Shepherd, was brought up, yesterday, to receive
sentence, having previously plead guilty to the
fsct Of having them in his possession. The
amount Of the vouchers was sass. On the appli-
cation Of his counsel, Il. n. Chase, ESQ.,, which
was not opposed by the District Attorney, the
Court took into consideration the long time he had
already suffered Imprisonment, and only sentenced
him to an additional three months Imprisonment
and fine Of &.
Before the prisoner was taken from the court he
appealed for mitigation Of the sentence. The
Court consented to waive entry Of the sentence on
the record until this day, so as to give him an op-
portunIty 10 produce guaranty for his good COZ
duct, IN the event Of his ldoinc which, the three
months imprisonment will probably be remltted.
CASE OF CAPT. ANDERSON.
Nj. s. 4. Goodwin then addressed the Court az
follows II wish to call the attention OF your hon
or to the case Of the United States ys. Capt Wolf
Il. Anderson, case in respect to which propose
to ask the Court to enter a noNe prose.
OUT. 1t was Gaze In which an account In
fhe 5ishnrs;n~ Gf,cer af Wsshin"+anp pten @ ~
nfice ~ Iii X Graau a. atto1ar =, rasnpusa tas
and which account was asccttalned, BY the depart
mcut, to be false. Il was an account for subslat-
ing recruits in the 120th regiment Illinois Volun-
teere, and the amount OF it was $611 20. II was
" Tefi9ea y eel1ncate pnipoftlnSt to DC aigaed By
- s II! g5anh 1sceipt, a1so pnfport-
o Tn sss
!ee1es Mets LIE sups,s.e1 Ia anu were m1etefea
s t,n,1 a1 m os,1 o os COT
public, Publ Charles Beatie 1t T Poatiae, On the 's 81
"lt rc.Ifcd ~ tho aSn.t1sn "a ~ sol X H
rier ~ Iirfnc:yyon - % ronnEV ao eea u LIS
andeIson. and tiat iii was based Hnon tbe evi.
Genc tSen tsiTen a. tn nnf,in anaePsnnsa @ s,s ~
tnIe he,1,n1 rcnnine Nv }nnnfr,es ai1ca thst 49,
1xhn sa ,ce,, ttnToscg .a,, i5 me
1re r. not his renine eiensfnr and tat bo in
nntbin1 ~ - r. the r,sitcr Tha tatannna ua1 -
~ hsirea + !" h antsn IN sala tnat
&c ~ az ~ W :. ..1 son s'E ulnte,
nov Is TIT or comparing M # Mith papers that are
he wnniS nnt Is T;iti,o 1o Ira that fn-aasio,, ~
ajn,y here en- now. " TheFs Il no % otheI eTdenee to to
sonnect Captain Anderson with this transactinn,
nna t9s WIEN 81 sa .c ~ 1 5aE mere
hing the Investigation. that there was conspiTa
~ nsG Eap 1monS oe
II, by Capt, Anderson, and attestcu bvtWo ctizens
Of tic place: Upon examination, no such persons
a9 90 aGnne hare T. taet os Eed thsr
pscertairfng whether any such names were in the
mueter-roll OF the regiment, the answer being In
Ihe Heganse: Iae oenGI is p.e.ty atsons tnat tne
certifed ~ the nnfarTa aes1 n NJ Heatfie hnf ~
cogdinE to Mi. Beattie's statement, that was not
eoTwGaptaI1a 90 paIa 4; Anoersoa neser aienea1i;
have reason to Know that the claim to personatc
Captain Anderson was made from here to the de-
s3, ,a n ea nc 10 - geas s raas M
be was On the march from Louisville to PctTyyille
and In two days was fighting at Per1yville-
h t " t u y tIua
na1 conye ntion waited nnon nc ann enoEe in fhe
highest terms or his honorable cha1acter and this
representation seems to be nnffe5m,y a4ppo1tsd.: d.
centain tnIc-eou ehnn,3 he ,nnobt Snra natit
Juiy. an sure could not prosecute him, and
even If were 40 far TO forget my duty. do not
~ u. M ,as Ie,sa - E thess
in the case.
The Court eoncuEEed, and nol2s p,0se2ua was
aeeoto'ng's entered. -.-....
WI. n1oogs''' u o'ooset1< a. " 1ashon' appeared
on oenan u sap'' Anoezsoa'
me case Of enafes d. Danlels Fs. the chicago
aoa hoeA Aslanu haltoao company, IN reference
70 wnaen mos:on lof ne" 1f1a1 ~ oe1enoants
nas neen neaso ouflng the present term ana certa-
roticed in this paper At the time. has advanced
anothcr ,tace connse, for n1,,r+,a renrcaantsd
TINT 1sere fsar % Of e1,eat nat
viring to the period at which decialon could be
| s-s-aa a. .r5 aa.y-ad +h.+ +ho dora, s,t ,,,,s
NJ, nc .,r M r W. snsa'u
| 1t should occur The Court required the counsel
for the defengc to acrec to this etpulafion IT was
~. e IT,. =. ~ ~-'4I 14A|'on' - VICE
accordingly DONE
tbie week IN hearine notions IN cbsneerv: he VII NJ
"ssh ~ n.a "s ~, ~ 10 WI
| on --4sday; he will then speud two or three days
IN tnishipr Tho balance of the t.rn,.hr .,1ass
amongst whletwtu BE- he motion for nev trisl
In the case Of CoEbin ys. n. s. Hammond ct a.
WoopwAnp, BALDWIN 4 Co., "a. TN I111so1.
e1sIaA1 AA1.HoAo Coins case which Is OF
considerable importance to the commercial com.
munity, and to railroad shareholders, was tried
before the Hon. David Davis. in the United States
Circuit Courfs Last week. The jury were We be-
lierc, unanimous in hztng upon verdict for the
Fl@1n.e' WV u.n''eu "4oss 90 ~ a.aoaAt' aaes
were discharged. and the case continued to the
October term. Ne give below q verbatim report
" -, eAa.ss y. ouus Da'1s ~ sAs sats' Ana, as
IL nemofaeee complete history IN miniature, Of tho
case We present it without further comment:
patiently to tits case, and TIC Court retnrns yn
its thanks for the attention you have eiyen to Tho
facts and to the arguments Of couusef'
Illinois Central railroad COMPANY made cnnt-act
with the plaintiffs In this case ard what il the na
ture Of IT. It does not seem to be understood by the
counsel for the piaintida that The Illinois Central
Railroad Company could, through it, agents at
Memphis, make contract to take freight Or rot H.
| ton either to Baltimore Or any other placc. Usu.
whether TaiIroads or stcambnats oenerni'r ro1,
tract to deliver At nsrtfrnisr nisres ;th} w ~
limits iu which theft railroad o. steamboat rms,
cntIa Raad II It ebose t. en1sy wy me nnos
Mcmnbs to fee tie ROAD canuot NJ 1a.I5 age1ss a.
4ha+a ~ 90 ~ m.ta +h Tnia: n.aAe GontlacI
t;sI1o q ~ - ~ ~ aaf .;, ~ Gentsa' Ha1ifoaa
ltl s4s se1s sfa9s'I OF felgat over the differ
n, Nov The nlllofhdips; i there was one giren at
F1, fW1,h, - n.it. ~ naaumSIe, tuns t9fough
f[o,., r. nPdsan 70 aon aaEe to decide,
'oE M gaseH91 e. ~ ~ tmeMIpnis:
Dsu, dunen, me Jas5 nno tnat me Illinois Central
.1sa 1Hi lEcfseo tne properly at Mem
ph,s; nndsf this oiH ol ladlng the b Of ladins is
uinu!nE U ane IallIoag' ana runs through to Bal
tinoIe. NotH1tnsIahalng tncse may have been
fnle a. Gai5o: tha5 mere Was to be receipt gfgen
!o{ aA suca l1elgol, anu ihere WAS none here, In
Ihis eane FIJI II comes 70 thts, was IT received on
thus nlH o. ianing by the !4tnoia Central Railroad;
s II .ae an s L a. Amth9 to sh
ance Of this blu q lading Il So fs the contract
bstWeen the parties Dill Of lading usually par
cpartzes tue articles carried as freight, but still
1t ALEC contains the tena ofa contract, and By that
Now, common carriers are insurere, except
against the act Of God "a Thunderstorm or the III
q open public enemies; and the court holds that
if the jury believe that this cotton was received at
Cafro, on this bill oflading, then that bill Of 1ading
contains the contract between the parties to he
ehipment; and also, then the next question is az
to whether the Illinois Central Railroad Company
have right to reet1ict their responsibility! Gpon
the question have no doubt that they have right,
In transporting an article Of such fnaammab1ea a
saying they viii not be responsible for loss Or