The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-01-14
LEGAL INTELLIGENCE.

supreme COurt-Chef Justice w oodward and
Justices Thompson, Read and Agnew.-FenfOnT Tor
renee VS. Hitchman Terrence. Error 10 Common
Pleas OF Wesmoreland county. Opinion by Agne",
James kilIinger, Isrnishee of Charles Gearing,
VS. Andrew Harterpee Error TO District Court of
Allegheny county. Judgment affirmed
Hughes appeal from decree OF Orphans Court OF
Allegheny county, in accounts OF George TreYman.
guardian. lOpiniOn by Reed, j. DeIcee OF Orphans
Court reversed and and report OF auditor confirmed,
except in last quarters rent of bre very in use. All
costs OF al the pfOceedlnRs TO De PAID out OF the
funds in the hands of the guardian.
1he Peoples Insurance Company VS.. Mickey.
Error 70 Common Pleas OF Allegheny county
stearns va Merchants Bank. Error to Common
Pleas Of Erie county. Opinion by Reed, j. Judg-
ment affirmed.
COnrow VS.. Schoss Motion for writ TO Hon.
George NJ. Stroud. Per curiam.
Thornton Conrow comes before US by written
petition, verified by his oath, setting forth that on
the trial OF an issue in the District Court OF Pmlade
phia, wherein Schoss b Brothers were plaintltts,
and the petitioner was delendant, before the aOn'
and Jury duly empaneled therein on the l7th day
of November 1866, the said Judge DISCHARGED the
the petitiOnl and that the counsel of the petitioner
before said jury deliberated on their verdict and IN
their presence did except to sa charge as is spe-
cifcaiiy set forth in exhibit accompanying said
pettOnb and that the said Judge did then and there
Tbe petItion further alleges that afterwards, pur
suant to the rules OF practice in SAID District
Court, his unse presented formal Dill OF excep.
tiOns to Judge stroud, with the exceptions as made
at the time of the trial. ana requested the said
Judge to afhx his seal thereto, which he then and
there refused 10 do. A second presentation of the
exceptions. aud a refusal to seal them, s also set
forth in the petition.
The petition concludes with prayer that writ
be awarded out of the Court conformablv to the
statute in such cases made and provided command
ipg Judge Stroud to appear at certain day, either
to confess denv the matters alleged ana IL he con-
TESS the same to affix his seal to said exceptions.
The statute here luded 10, If tnat of Westminster
I'd 13 Edw. l, cap. 81, which is the statute that
gives bills OF exceptions, and which has been eX-
tended to this State In Drexel VS., Manu. w. and
=. 397, II was he'd that mandamus could not issue
from this Court to the Dlstrct Court OF Philadel-
delpha, commanding that Court 20 seal a bill
under the act OF Westminster, but tnat
a special writ, setting forth the circumstances TO
the case, and commanding the judges If they be
true to afx their seals to the bill, the proper
practices; and copy OF the appropriate writ taken
from the Register is given IN toot-note to tae
report of the case
It is this writ that the petitioner prays for. It is
not writ of mandamus, for if the Judge return
that the facts alleged untrue, we proceed no
farther but leave the party to his action az law for
false return. If the Judge confess the bill of ex-
ceptOns he is bound to seal it, and this duty may be
enforced
the charge of the exceptions truly set out in
the exhibit the petitioner is entitled to sealed bill
and. in awarding the writ, we direct copy of the
exhibits to be served on the Judge along with the
WIit. Let the writ issue. Returnabe on Saturday
next, January 10, 1867 at 10 O'Clock A. M. d. w.
Sellers for petitioner.
NtsI Prius-Judge Strong.-James MulhOlland
VS.. John II GOldbeck and Samuel Lawrence. Ar
action bv tenant against his landlord to recover
damages for unlawfully digging up his garden On
trial.