Delaware tribune. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1867-1877, 1867-11-28

nignt Oh tnc 5lbt august nnu btehiinB pur OF
boots. Verdict guilty. Sentenced to pay S16
restitution money, costs, on next Saturday stand
IN the pillory one hour, whipped with twenty
lashes, and imprisoned one year.
State vs. Charles Polk, lcoD.-Assault and bat
terry on Arthur Roberts. Guilty of an assault, and
sentenced to pay fine of $40, costs, imprisoned
months.
State VS.. George BeckIey.-Assault and battery
on John ]. Smith. Verdict not guilty, prisoner
discharged.
The trial list was called. Among the number
marked for trial. was that of Herbert VS.. Nebeker.
The case Of Mahlon G.. Gallagher vs. Walton,
Whann u Co., was settled.
State Us. David Green, lcol.l Indicted for as
testimony was to the effect that David Green
struck Levi Green with an axo knocking him
senscless John II. Rodney, counsel for defense,
sought TO prove that the mind of Green wns im-
paired Verdict guilty. Sentenced to pay $1,000
imprisoned two years and six months.
State VS.. George Scott, (col.) indicted for
larceny of riding bride from James Taylor.
Verdict guilty. Sentenced to pay IS cents resti-
lashes, imprisoned one year and wear the con-
vict's jacket six months after discharged
State VS. George Hall, indicted for forging
check on the First National Bank, for 1882, sign
cd by II. s. McComb Plead guilty and was
Tory one hour imprisoned In solitary confinc-
ment three months and one year afterwards wear
conyicl's Jacket.
State VS.. Jos. Nugent, charged with larceny of
coat, pants, vest, shirt, &C., Of Michael Meeney.
ton money 1870, be whipped with ten lashes,
imprisoned six months and wear the convict's
jacket six months after discharged.
State vs. George Scott (col.) indicted for steal
ing q geldlng, the property of James Budd.
Verdict guilty. Sentenced to pay as restitution
money $3.50, 5000 fine. and be whipped with
twenty lashcs.
State VS. Saml Golden and Henry Davis (col.)
Indicted for stealing corn from Jos N. 81 Levi
Cooch. Verdict guilty, and each sentenced to
pay as restitution money 1878, be whipped with
twenty lashes, imprisoned one year, and six
months after discharge wear the conyicts jacket.
State vs.. Andrew Caulk (eol.) indicted for as
sault and battery on John Clendaniel. Verdict
not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged.
A writ of ri Fa was asked for by Attorney
General Moore against George Hail. to summon
Garnishees. This was done so that any money
belonging to Hall could be secured to pay the fine
and costs. The writ was granted.
James Booth was arraigned for the murder OF
Vim. Smith on the 28th OF last August, and next
Friday set for the-day of trial.
SATURDAY.
State VS.. Henry E. Stickney, indicted for steal
ing marc from James Todd and Mary Ann Todd
of Brandywine Hd., on the 10th inst. Rumford
for the State, Bird for defence.
James Todd testified to finding that the mare
was taken and that his nephew brought him back.
Bennicker Younker, police officer of Chester,
testified that at about o'clock on the morning
of the 10th he arrested the prisoner, riding
it a suspicious time to be riding about, he asked
him where he was going, and he was told, to
Philadelphia. The mans answers not proving
satisfactory he locked him up.
Stickney then told witness that he had missed
the train in Wilmington and started to walk to
Philadelphia, that he found bride along the
railroad and concluded to get horse, SO he
stepped over to Todds stable, near the railroad,
and took the mare. He had no intention OF
keeping or selling her, but intended riding to
Philadelphia and leaving the mare there. He
only took her TO help HIM along on his journey.
George w. Todd, nephew of the first wit
ness, testified to receiving the horse Of the police
and taking 1t home. He had q talk with the
he told the police. Witness also testified to the
bride being an unusually light one.
But one witness was examined for the defence.
He was Mr.. Josiah w. Putnam, superintendent
Of the Railroad Companys Shops In this city.
He came from the same town with the prisoner,
Wilmington, Mass. Knows prisoner; knows his
family well they are highly respectable family;
has known prisoners reputation for twenty years
and it has always been good. This closed the
testimony.
The prisoner is well dressed young man,
rather intellectual looking, and has received a
Collegiate education. He persists in his assertion
that he only took the horse for the purpose stated,
and had no idea of selling him. The Jury, how
ever, were not satisfied with the explanation, and
brought in verdict of guilty.
The Court sentenced him to pay $3.50 restitu-
tion money to pay a fine and costs, and on Satur-
day next to stand in the pillory one hour and be
whipped with twenty lashes.
The civil list was taken up.
Thomas j. Kendall u.s. Hersey & King.-Gor-
don for plaintiff, Spruance for defendants. Judg-
ment non suit.
Julius o. Krauch rs. Solomon Hersey.-Har-
non suit.
Isaac G. Loland u.s. Myers G. Conwcll.- Bayard
for plaintiff, Gordon for defendant. Judgment
for plaintiff.
Thomas b. Eaton u.s. VIM. Dcvou.-McCaulley
for defendant Plaintiff failed to appear judg-
menL non suit.
Gibbins Il Evans Is. VIM. Herbert, Sheriff
Bayard for plaintiffs, Patterson for defendant
Judgment for plaintiffs for costs.
VIM. II. Sutchells rs. James Crowden.-G. b.
g. j. II. Rodney for plaintiff Gray for detendent.
Judgment for plaintiff for costs.
Thomas Dixson VS.. VIM Thatcher. Patterson
for plaintiff, McCaullcy for defendant. Judgment
for plaintiff $3.50.
John E. Gould vs.. John NJ Enos. Lore for
plaintiff, Whiteley for defendant. Judgment
confessed, $4,000.
Bradford and Higgins for plaintiff, Whitelcy for
defendant. The counsel for the defence moved
that the plaintiff show cause why all further pro-
oeedings should not be stayed in this case. As
this was new motion the Court did not feel pre-
pared to give decision without further deliber-
| alton, but advised the plaintiff to abandon the
/ suit
A. II. Glimshaw VS.. Jos. II. Chandler. Case
| discontinued.
Moses Rash, garnishce VS.. Il. A. GODDARD. Bird
for plaintiff Bradford and Higgins for defendant.
Jury returned verdict for defendant, and iudg-
ment for s95.4s .
VIM. J: Keys vs.. VIM. sutchell. Gray for
plaintiff, G. B. and j. II. Rodney for defendant.
Case settled judgment for plaintiff $50.
REPORT OF THE GRAND JURY,
The Grand Jury having disposed of oil the easei
before them made their report.
II states that they have at the present term con,
| Sdercd four hundred and ten presentments, and
have returned three hundred and cighty-four true
bills, Ignoring twenty-siX. Two hundred and
seventy of these cases were TOR selling goods with
out license.
They had made the usual official visit to the
county prison and found it and its inmates in the
same good condition to which reference was made
In the report at the May term. They reiteiatt
their former recommendation for an increase o.
room.
The report concludes as follows.-
A very large proportion of the business before
the Grand Jury is made up of cases of assault
and battery, petty larceny and selling liquor con
trary to law, and from the very trivial nature O.
many of these cases, we are decidedly of TIT
opinion that the laws of the State should be 81
modified, as to provide for the trial of all sucl
cases. by Court similar to that established b,
the act Of General Assembly, passed March 9th
1861 and repealed February, 1865 causing les
delay in business Of more importance, and saving
a heavy expense TO the county.
It is not unfrequently the case that prsone
is supported at the public expense in the county
jail, for several months, for the larceny of som,
article of less value than one dollar, when Their,
is really not sufficient evidence against him t
justify true bill of Indictment. We woult
therefore suggest that an effort be made to secur
such alteration in the law as will obviate these
difficulties, and save the Courts this vas
amount of unimportant business
(Sgned) SAMUEL JEFFERSON,
Foreman.
There being no further business before them
they were discharged, the Court thanking then
for their prompt and faithful discharge of thei
duties.
John NJ. Woods VS.. John VI. Boyd.-Bayar,
for plaintiff, Gordon for dcfendent Verdict 10
doiendcnt.
TUESDAY.
Moses Rash VS.. John s. Kcrsey.-Gordon 70
plaintiff, Harrington for defendant. In the fal
OF 1864, four persons, Messrs. Rash kersey, Ha2
zard, and Knowles went into the substitute bro
ker buSinesS EaEh furnished the money amount