The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-10-24

low-Rober Coffee, charged with assault ana battery
lady's eyes. whose case was reported as not con-
cuded has been conv cted. Sentence deferred.
VOTING.
William Davis charged with having voted lille
gelly on last election day. The bill OF indlotment
on the sh Inst anu that certain oflSers voted
polls oftl Seventh Division Of the Fourth Ward
daSs before the election waS oered In eVense b
IL6 prosecution Objected % by the defense on the
proper evidence prove that Ihe sheFIf proclaimed
Judge, who said that the Court would take oficiSi
defendant handed in ticket at the polls or the sew
enth diyison OF the Fourth Ward and gave his name
81 william Davis and his vote was written down as
policeman endeavored to prevent him fron voting,
but railing in that arrested him for having illegally
voted. Upon being questioned as to his residence he
proven prove was only board yard He afterwards said
msboTs Hnd rom nS the s Ig9e az Ses
that daring the ten days preceding the election he
locality to locelity and was, therefore, unqualified to
The defense argued that the evidence offered to
prove the holdi9g Of the election was insufficient;
and vote were marked on the return as No. %, the
presumption was that the election officers did their
and finding whether or not he was qualified resi-.
dent and hnding him such; had allowed h@ to vote,
away with by the most positive proof and
had not been pI oduced to prove the defendant un.
qualified; had they been convicted OF dishonest
evidence to show the his doing
TO prove that the defendant was the man whose name
shown on the election return; and lastly, that,
The Judge, In charging the jury. said the odsnse
prised that the act OF Assembly inflicted short
Il could not be denied that When the purity 6s
ballet was n tne w9nid come 80
proven, whether republican form Of government
could be maintained in densely populated com
50 long Ss the bsllotboI was kept pure and InviQ
It's Wis Ior but when the bAotbox was abused, then,
Notwithstanding all the efforts OF parties and the
powers of Congress, the Government was most hope
The most important point In the whole case was
whether or not the defendant voted whether he
wonid not as yet so decide. an indictment might be
drawn averring the contents Of the ticket deposited
thai Inc deendant did vote DU
The question whether Il was absolutely necessary
and, il decided In the Affirmative, the conviction
head; but II t was decided negatively, then the
nam Holias was charged with the larceny Of
coupon bond for the payment OF s5Ol issued by the
John wstsr. Jr,. and with receiving the same know
Ing II to have been stolen M Wstsr testified that
Of the Duncaunon Iron Company were blown open,
stolen. The number of the bond was SAL.
The peEt time he saw the bond amer the larceny
was in last June and II then in the hands Of The
Treasurer Of the North Pennsylvania railroad Com
p1Fiyancs wistar the brother of the owner Of the
bond testified that he bought thI5 bond, Snd 9,hsrs
no knowledge Of his own as 70 the numbers OF tue
ceve after the larceny from the brokers Of whom he
nurcbsRpd hem. On trial.
DISTRICT CoURT.Jndge shsrswood @Horano n.
RnrTOughs VS. David v. Ahl. An action for damages
for Injury sustained by alleged breach OF contract It
was ALLEGED that the defendant entered into an agree
rent with plalntin to sell him certain furnace and
certain lots OF machinery Tor 5000 and the plAinih
hound himself to purchase the same at the said price,
| nsying some OF the money down..
IL was also agreed that IT, before tue transactlon
was concluded either party should sell the property
for more than $4,000, the excess should be equally
| divided between them; and u sueh sale was
made by the defendant he should also refund Whst
part of the consideration had already , osen paid.
peTty for 10000 but persstenty refused 10 refund the
money already paid by painth ana 10 pay him tlOOO
| Ma noiety OF the excess over 5000 Jury oul.N,
| N'nIST'RfCT COURT--Judga HAre.-L, walker q
| BrotRer vs. Adams Express Company; An action 70
racover Also In gold, with interest, alleged TO nave
| hcan sbstTaoted from packageot $4,000, deposite
Win defendant at Memphis for delivery here whiIe
| IN defendanps possession. Verdict for plaintiff
| S25448. ,,.. -. .,rit,t.,, ruvr,ar admin
| ,siraIoI q action on a book account Ontrlal.
| limited STATES DISTRICT OOURT-Jndg Cad
| vUSiader-The Unted states VS. Stills eto, Harvey
| CO.. claimants, Before reported Nesoio' toF Ra'
United states