Evening star., 1867-11-14
THE COITRTS

reversed the decis inn of the court heIow and
p eaiu .nat tne custom was reasonable in its
character, sanctified by time. and in the an
srnce OF any other proof should control their
relations. Tne only question that mad been
Ials@u IN tne mnd of the Court was whether
tue character OF The employment, with its du =
rauon before payment Commenced was within
mat custom. Evidence OF the custom did not
Itiate 10 Iahor In laying the foundation ere.
athe nshlng ground, but related to the
Worklng OF II after operations were commenced
mere was one feature of the case that looked
III me ahsence OF aDY explanations though
mere was more than the usual waste, wear
ahu tedr OF tue years time to be performed:
and there was nothing in this custom. Al
Ieast the Court would not lend its assumption
70 me suppositon that there was anything in
ths custom that converted the value of
ones labor TO another in layng the fouu.
dation of fishery, the original enter
prise IN the form of building the habita,ions
Ihere was no custom disclosed in the case
that would impose gratui,ous labor upon the
employee for any such purpose. The custom
as he understood II. was that when a fishery
was established with view to It's current
workings, employees were engaged. tt ey were
Kept IN allegiance as 10 payment until the seine
was dropped except as to support The cus-
tom as thus explained is not an unreason able
one The employee was anxious for a berth
and ne had to anticipate the day OF fishing I,
secure II. The employer on his part rendered
10 the employee, food and shelter, and ordina-
Tily mere would be idle time and the employee
ior tne purpose or securing his berth rendered
his labor incidental 10 securing reparaton al
read y established, that appears to De the land
mark OF the custom.
Lankfon and Linsburg VS.. Thomas Leary
N. II Miller, for appellant, asked for q rever-
sal OF magistrates judgment, under the con-
sruction OF the recent act OF Congress exempt
ing certain properly OF debtors from lew, a.
tachment, or sale on execution, in this Dis
trlct." Judgment reversed.
Mr Morsell asked for judgment final, by de.
Ianlt, n, In case OF Willett & Redgrave vs.. Sol.
Hoffer VS.. Brown; Kelly VS.. Naylor; Worster
VS.. Kaiser: were settled.
, To-day, the Jury was called. and several OF
those drawn from the box answered 10 their
names. Excuses We're heard and r. J Falk-
ner r. M BirkheaG, Robert Boyd, Ferdinand
Butler, Andrew Bischoff, John Il. Bryan. X.
Martin, Geo Luskey, II. Clay Stewart Ho.
ratio Moran and Rudolph BuchIy
MIR. Riddle had three cases placed on the
present trial docket by motion. The appeal
set for trial to-day called-Stevens VS.. Kirby:
MOTIFS and Thompson. Kane VS.. Washington:
Bradley and Norris: witness called. Court
erar ted rule on magistrate TO return warrant
1rom court below. The ground was proceed
ing against a married woman when her hus-
band was present; warrant returned Neither
the warrant nor Judgment of magistrate ought
10 be returned, but the record of the case:
passed until the record was supplied Oar
row VS. Gallagher and wife; continued for the
acton of the Equity Court
GaliaDer VS.. Wisseh. Continuance stands
Jury called, and % answered 10 their names
The INST twelve names of the jury retained to
Try any Jury case that may arise; the other
Jurors were discharged until Monday morning
a. ten o'clock.
MIR. Norris. in case of Stevens vs. Kirby
Case tried before Justice Miller, and An appeal
taken from his judgment Mr.. Kirby was an
officer, and charged the usual fees; custom
fixes IL Thompson Statute cannot b, over
ruled ny usage. The fees on teri fdcins, re-
plevlnhtachment, appraisement and sale dis.
ualniEe and selling tor rent. elght pounds
OF tobacco, by act of Maryland, 1879, and there
Is no other law applicable 10 the case. lie
charges S2n for some few hours services and
ne claims that his services Were rendered a
an Nicer, and not as q collector. Witnesses
examined. Mr. Kirby SAID the usual custom
has been 10 charge - per cent. on amount COL
IFC'ed- II officer was given a disfrain, and he
collected, the usual amount was charged If no
SAFE
Judge Cartter-This is a curious case. 1t is
Sald To oe uniform custom 70 charge less for
dolrg the work than when you don't do the
WORK a pubic officer executing public
ministerial duty. without any law PXceut an
olo, superaEnuated statute OF Marylani-a
statute that, if rendered literally. would now
be enormous, and a few years back nothing. /
Will leave IT where the custom OF the city has
lett, or rather the neglect has left it, And
the custom is about as vicious as the statute is
impractcabe 1t Is a preposterous charge
and, with all the immunities in favor of con-
stables, ought not TO be countenanced and |
Will not do il. Mr.. Wise aptly Saws the ems.
tom mas been according to the bargain made.
winch is very good. But we have no evidence
OF custom. The law is Obsolete, and how are
We TO get al il, Ill discha rye the case in the
most reasonable light L can, and allow Mr.
kirny what he would have been entitled to if
NJ bad levied and sold. Judgment for appel
ee, Sll-each party to pay their own CO sts
Mr. Webb moved to set aside Judgment by
cefault, in case OF Garrett VS.. Howard, by
consent Of parties. So ordered.
Case of Kelly VS.. Ward Hihe and Schmidt
appellant pleaded that he had made too many
Defendants and he pleaded coveture OF one of
the parties, as fatal 10 the action. Judgment
reversed: cost TO follow the Judgment, except
docket fee Of appellant
Kirkland and bowling vs. Barker: Adams
Matthews; discontinued by appellee.
BarEer VS.. bowling same; continued at cost
OF appellee.
Kane VS.. Corporation OF Washington: Brad.
ley and Norris; Judgment for appellant
sullivan Corporation of Washington:
Norris ana Bradley: continued al the costs OF
appellee
VIM N. II. Mack vs. Mayor and Corpora
ton OF Washington, for violating Corpora.
tion ordinance. Dy selling liquor on Sunday in
contravention of that statute, Miller for COM
piainant Bradley tor Corporation. Witness
examined. judgment court below was re-
versed.
Elliot VS.. Cook Mrs. Elliott deposits with
the clerk $500 in lieu of the additional bond
req uired TO b. given on the 18th inst, No 1865,
Judgment made final; j. j. Johnson
Appral Calendar being finished, the Trial
Docket was then taken up and cas- es disposed
OF by being settled, passed, dismissed or set for
trial.
EQUITY CoURT,-Justice Wylie.--Chesseldin
vs.. CbtsseldiIe: Oh der appointing guardian dd
reference 10 auditor. Beschke VS.. Dickson;
oTcer for INJUNCTION Scrivener VS.. Powell
decree appointing A. Lloyd trustee to sell.
In re-In bankruptcy. Joseph M. Brown,
bankrupt; order of reference 10 register.