New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-11-20
SUPREME coUET-cigeuu-SOv lo-Boforo Ja'he
snrp EnR WHISKY.

A NOTE FOR WHISKY
Dexter Britton e al agt. ELIAS friyett ct al
plaintiffs sue defendants for II 3j2, an alleged bal
aics due from defendants note which they are alleged TO
have given plaintiffs for certain whisky ana
carried on a drug business IN Poughkeepse n " and the
whisky in question was obtained py mem, a. ps
the delivery OF the whisky O. GOO paid the note
leaving The balance which is sued FOR Since the action was
brought both OF defendants father and have died and
was et executors werv appointed but refused to act
an administrator then appointed and this SUIT brought
against the administrator, with the viii annexed
e defense is that this whisky bought not by the hm
Of defendants but by the Junior member private spceua
ton and that plaintiffs knew this at the time OF sale
Counsel Tor plaintiffs opened the called one o. the plain
tifs as a witness read the note and then rested
then testimony showing mat defendants IN
s more than barrel at time and also that the
son verdict for plaintiffs Tor 500 a. being the full
amount claimed with interest Defendants were allowed 10
u'i WsvSe Tor plantfs J. H. Jackson for defendants
Publishes IN COURT.
TheopLlus B. Peterson and Thomas Peterson sg Evat d.
Long. 49,
booksellers Philadelphia being the vellknown house OF T.
b Peterson Brothers, They bring suit 70 recover from
deuant a. 4q4 being the amount with interest OF eleven
promissory notes which plaintiffs eego defendant drew ana
payable 70 plaintiffs orders at various times e9mmehelg
on the 5h Of July 1902 and ending on the 10th OF November
The defense Is that these notes Fere made without any
am Of October sG5 deienda insoiyent within the
ing Of the provisions OF Iits Part II chap Article
and by the acquescence Of cr4dp holding wothIds OF h
debts order was made by Brady Of the Court .o OF
cause on the I'D OF November why assignment should
@ m made Inv defendant and be BE- discharged from his debts;
hot on the latter day Judge Caozo granted defendant dis
charge OF all his debts and that this discharge eHemps defend
ami nom all the pretended Indebtedness To plaintiffs.
Roth plaintiff and defendant testified and their testimony
f defendant had failed four times and had renewed these
notes at his own request defendant esing that he only
failed and that he renewed the notes ut the request OF
niaintias preyious TO that failure
The iury will bring in sealed verdict this morning
Pnckney Campbell for plaintiffs Niles Bagey for de-
''n1'D" HOW FAR RECEIPT IN FULL Is VALID.
Weilbacher agt Barth.
In this case reported IN SATURDAYS Tribune In which Pn2
ant and in which defendant sets up receipt In iuh Tor
defense the Jury disagreed.
Before Mr. Justice JOSEPH +. BARNARD.
DECISIONS.
John II Van Evrie ngt The Mayor &ci John Ritty sgt
The Mayor &eJudgment for the defendant dismsng the
rSPRIL TERf-Before Justices BARNARD CLERKE and
NGRAHAM
Tue POLICE AND THE COUNTY OF RICHMOND.
The People rel John g. Bergen agt The Supervisors OF
Richmond County.
The original motion reported in these columns was Tor
manda to compel the Board Of Supervisors IN Sd
the County OF Richmond the moneys pay the salaries OF
ase. of station house horses &c and to their
interest bearing bofds for that purpose.
The action was brought by Mr. bergen the Treasurer Of
the Board Of Police. The motion made before Mt Justice
sutherland who denied the notion on the ground among
sor had authorized and approved the employment Of mum
Dor OF horses for horse patrol and the relaor Appealed Inc
appellant argues that the protection Of the County OF kemona
bS police force not TO await the action Of the Supervisors
as 10 mounted patrol bus TO 90 into effect immediately
soptn gent one and that the Board Of Police having made their
estimate the duty OF the Supervisors became peempoy Since
red power which concerned the public and was theivoe
mandatory. .. ........ =, -,,..-
The respondents contend that the whole act discretionary
and that portion relating the mounted patrol strong
argument That point that tie power 20 borrow does nol come
within the rule by which perssiye words sometimes con
the REALTORS 90 hlnA
In the relation q part Of the public seeking enforce
duty on IT, officers the public IN this being the INHABITANTS
on Richmond County OF which the rcator is not portion ana
that tie Supervisors have power to issue bonds at discount
and hat these bonds cannot now be sold az par.
nnu- raAlr.nA lhe dncLa-nn Of Tho Cnuri below.