The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-12-04
LEaAn INTELL1aNNoR,

COURT OF QUARTER sEssIoNs-Judge Brew.
Lima Dorm WAS CHARGED with the iareepv OF
watches and money, together valued at s7s the pro-
he resided at NO All Poplar street and the defendant
Ws1cheS and IN his SOs oSs S
usually hung his coat In closet In his bedroom at
went to the closet take the watches and found
that they and the money had been sto en-. The de
recovered two Of the watches at the AldermSn's
The same d. fendant was also charged with the lar
ceny of watch and money, together valued at S2j,
belonging to Claus Hagenmuiler. This gentleman
LOST his watch and money from bis pants as Mr..
Wagner had lost his The watch was restored to him
Mr.. Bell testified that about O'clock in the even.
tavern in Front street. He took her 70 the Alder.
m ans oioe, searched her, and found three watches
one of them as mis- watch, and Mr.. Wagner identified
John Cope pleaded guilty to a charge OF the larceny
% stole IL broad days nd %a
arrested In street car, with them in his possession
The Alleged Libel.
This morning the case OF the Commonwealth VS..
cSarged aa the editor Of the Sunday %erSSrS with ths
publication OF story lbeIiouso the character OF viii
defendant, by his counsel, j. Newton Brown aud
TsI because It was presented upon - return to tbs
term Of the court conrSry to the right OF the defen
and second, because the defendant had notice OF
the sending of the bill to the Grand Jury and was
thereby deprived his legal privilege Of challenging
the array of Grand Jurors.
by the Legislature to make binding over to the
second term; and the defendant had as much notice
the Grand jury and he had neglected, and therefore
The court overruled the motion to quash.
An application was then made for g continuance,
The Iied II that a. F. Hii was material witness 10 h@ @
ano was absent from tne clIy' he naa endeavored
ss % o9n to sut Is S
or his anecedsnts and did not refer 10 him He ex
peeted 70 prove that he did not read the article and
Mr. Dwight said that II This witness was on such
iished without examination the defendant certainly
was responsible for the publication in his paper OF his
Arguments for and against the application were
made by Mr.. Brown and by Attorney.General Brew
The Judge said he had not read the article but In
pTaoG oeea is HS
IN this S he would % & say that Il was mater
gated Where such grave charges are made against
due to his family due 70 the Court Co the Community
to the Commonwealth hch he represents, that they
trSe ss inGeed 1t should Be KnoS TO 6
pnplic they were untrue, 1t was equally ht to be
Mondsy next was spoken OF as the day for the trIa
menis ia the United States Court for that day. Mt.
Brewster said that without meaning any disrespect
favor from this Court for 1t had only during the
IN this Court. me case was hxed for Tuesday next
Nathan ]. Atkinson was convicted of charge of
BTo TSs BOOKS Missed o Re ors Sn
were ber noq1 10 Re
ton and AdOlphus Johnson all coored. were charged
with burglary. Francis Monaghan testified that on
the morning of Nov, 20, between midnight and day.
break, his establishment at the southeast cOrner of
Seventh and 81. Mary streets entered by the
back way, and was robbed Of clothing, liquor cigars.
ground beneath Johnsons residence, and hence
caused his arrest His confession caused the arrest OF
the others. On trial.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS-Judges Allison
and PeirceThe new trial motion list before the
Court to-day ....
sUPREME COURT AT NIsI PRIUs-Judge shars.
wood.-MotiOns and rules were before the Court
TO. day.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CoURT-Judge Cad
wals deT.-United States vs. Whisky. James Cantre
claimant. Before reported Verdict for the United
States,
United States VS.. twenty-five barrels of Whisky
Thomas j. Miller claimant. An infor nation of the
forfeiture of property for violation Of the revenut
law. II alleged that the liquor marked
rectlhed when il really was not so Verdict for the
United States.
The United States Eleven barrels Of Whiskey
James l.. Seybert, claimant. An Information Of th'
forfeiture Of liquor for violation OF the revenue law
On trial.