, 1864-01-29
When an Ejcctn1cnt Ccac has been
tried by The Court the Statute
Granting New Trials Is
1napplfcable.
Tho Unttcd stntes Circuit Court VIII Not
TnEE y Casc fT9n tho state
RECORD OF CaSEs IN THE DIFFERENT
Law COURTS.


eIectment suits. applies to those cases only in
which tho Judgment is based on the verdict Of
jury.
Borden for plaintiff. Walker 4 Dexter for de-
feudAut.
q. 8. DISTRICT Counr.--A novel proceeding WINS
commenced yesterday in the United States Dis
trict Court, Which we believe ls without precedent
in tho history OF American admiralty juriBpEu-
d.nce. Thle is no other than the commencement
Of suit In rem against The Rock Island Railroad
b,idge, on account Of alleged damages growing
ont Of the obstruction which tho bridge presents
to tho uninterrupted navigation OF the river.
The lbe11ant fe tho Minnesota Packet Company,
which euea for the loss Of steamboat and other
property thrown against the bridge, claiming dsu-
ngcs to the amount Of seTeuty-1ve thousand dol
la1s. This libellinG bridge certainly appears to
be 4 somewhat startling innovation upon the or
dinaty couree Of Admiralty processes, and think
that Admiralty lawyers will wait with more than
usna Interest for the intellectual combat which is
to determine whether such process ia sustaina-
bic. Proctor for thetlibellant- Robert Rae. OF
counsel, Arlington i Dent, and Goodwin, Larned
& Goodwin.
In the case Of 1e.ac Parks ys. the Illinois Grand
Trunk Railroad. Of which the t1Ial was concluded
before Judge Drumnond yesterday morning, the
plaintiff recovered Judgment Of $a,771s.ss. The
plaintiff tucd Oh Quaatuna meTuIt for work and
u
ptccluded the plaintiff from euelng generally on
qrenfeka u,eruat.
contract was offered in evidence, signed by
pcrsons who appear By the records Of the Com
Company to enter into contract with the plain
titE The resolution appointing these persons
euch committee, gave them no power to execute
name Of the Company. Otherwise than a. above
stated and the seal Of the Company wns affixed
thereto: Under @ thesc elreumstaiccs. the p,alntiG
dcrce, ior reasons apparent upon the face Of the
paper, bqt The court though with soma hesltancY,
it twas In evidence that the plaintiff complained
| when the contract was presented to him TOT his
Signature that 1t was not In accordance with the
company, and tho sipnaiions Of which, It was m
detsiood that this contract was designed to GIL
body, md that he signed i under protest, and
Of the company, who presented 1t for Parks stgns-
tnre, that he would use his influence to have q
| Of the Instrument 90 modified as to accord viii
Mssksa snds. this state o ;hngs
the jury as matter Of Inv, that If they believed
special contract, embracing the subject naatter Of
and the defendant, tie plaiatid eonid not fscoser
n That form OF action upon = Eu1atum NseFujt.
vs.diet s a Of The jury ~ ws before stated; Hart
La.ned = Goodwin for defendant.
Judge Du1nmond, day before yesterday, gave
o tn a. sgpsso3, 4,s foE he
Be directed ta the Superior Court of Chieago, md
plicalion made BY said defendants to the Superior
removed into de Circuit Court of the G United Cd
&c in ali
the decisions that Eeemca to bear On the point In
gseas had not conferred npon he United States @
Circuit Court the poTer to issne uandamus in
| the case in question.
OF the remedy that defendant has in this matter,
aftel quoting the act Of the eth Of March, 1873,
ofee1s Of Tie United States, rom the State Courts
tic latter Court ito issue writ Of ceritorari to
ee fda sd ssa Cent ga to
cccdrcs in ssid cause" md gives ~ 4 NECESSARY @
pl!ance with the witt. The Judge adds:
done IN this case. They hare not seen 1t to DO 80.
judge Of ths ssst thelcs2 sS tss .hs
statute gives him. but that 1t is competent for the
State court to redress the wrong, II wrong has
In ss,e es oa ts s y @
then thai the Supreme Court OF the United Will do
up hsse gone 10 The Supreme cea1t of The e 1nised
States, mud tho error Of the State court where
Cont. ~' '@''e -
us17ED STATES C1ncu1r CoukT-B1ors Hon.
71os- Vrrsanaond. Judge-!Co4nmon Lo,o:
No. s18- Lusk, Exr. ~ the Illinois Grand Trunk
ant moves for new trial.
70: 4as- Bassett rs. Holmes. Judgment for
No. 3s7EU. s. T.. rs. schooner MIllard Fillmore.
Petition to cell Tesse granted upon giving ten days
No, ta-;wheeler va. underhin. Leave to
No.--n the matter Of petition Of Hiram
Fes5so9 i i9 bs9aIuRtcy, report OF sale by the ss
No. 271-Woodworth vs. clenenger ct al. Case
given to the Jury and they have handed in sealed
Criminal casey:
Q. S. A: r.. Geo. ". Observation-Disclosures for
issning talse vouchers upon the Government)
Same ve. came Indictment 10. presenting false
,,S1 Sgs5ai9s y SS9egs516ars Chief Ja.tes job" H.
:sIs.Es e. ss. S Henderson ct al. petaalt of al de-
PENDANTS except Rognoi and Henderson, for want
1Byose Hon. jdt. E. Gary, Judge Common
:s:-steln ct al. ru. Leopold ct al. Judgment for
co,;s 81 ,, = Bs Dismissed at plaintiffs
C1neulT counr-7Before Hon. E. s. Williams.
~ Miller rs. Wells ct al. Trial resumed.
,H9H.hinball Us. Rueeo ct al Dismissed nt
,T21Hayden ct a. vs. The Western Transports
ts4-Yonne ct ii. vs. wetth. same order,
Ns-Harrison VI. Rider Dismissed With prote-
dcnao for Noncompliance with rule entered 18th
Inst.
sG1--Hsnks ve. WIlee. Death Of plaintiff sng-
gested, and Caroline n. Hanks, 'exeeutrlx, made
SMALL Pox AT CANT DoUGLAs.-1n some
way or other rumor has gained considerable
erffiff fhrnurh fhata tar1 y,r1u,.