Western Reserve chronicle. [volume] (Warren, Ohio) 1855-1921, 1868-12-23
eourt proceedings.

SOuIl T~EOceeCl0SS.
The case I Ralsa CIsTkvs Reuben sponsler
occupied Tuesday, Wednesday, and part Of
Thursday. This IS a suit upon lsnd contract,
where plaintiff claimed . large amount OF
purchase money due, while defendant
claimed that he had made divers payments
for which plaintiff had not given him credit.
It was a pretty close case, and was sharply
tried by Taylor & Jones for plaintiff, N F.
E Hutchins and Il. J. Hyde for defendant.
Verdict for p~laintiff Of S994.l0. Second trial
demanded by plaintiff.
Mark Goldrick against the same defend
ant was tried Thursday. Plaintiff claimed
damages for breach Of contract for getting
out slaves, to the amount Of 81 800. Verdict
for defendant. Hyde for plaintiff, Hutchins
&Gldden for defendant.
The next case was that Of Theodore F. Nc
Cornell vs. NcClsin & Ward, for balance due
for services as clerk. Plaintiff claimed that
he was in the employ OF defendants as clerk
for n year, beginning in April, 1867, with
out any special bargain as to salary; that he
had received S62s.2S, and that his services
were worth s., 200, and claimed the difference,
S57I.72. Verdict for plaintiff for SAB En-
sign for plaintiff, Stub for defendant. No
costs awarded plaintiff Defendants de-
manded second trial.
Friday the case Of Ohio on complaint OF
Mary Thomas, vs. James Borden, Bastardy,
was tried. Mary appeared in Court with one
item Of evidence In the shape Of a good
natured baby Of eight or nine months, and
sIoEe that James was the fsther. James not
being willing to admit the soft Impeachment.
s~trenuously denied the paternity Of the child,
and succeeded in convincing some Of the
jury OF the truth OF his statement, for they
were not able to agree and were discharges.
StuI for complainant, Taylor & Jones for de-
PENDANT.
A. E. Andrews & Son VS. Benz. Bush was
tried to the Court. Suit brought upon prom
issory note, and Offset set up as defence.
Judgment for plaintiffs Of S265.5l. Hutchins
and Spear for plaintiffs; Gen. Rstliff for de-
fendant. Hr-t
4 complaint having been made against
n Il A. Schremerhorn for cattle stealing,
the Prosecutor procured the calling OF a
special grand jury on the Eth. That body
investigated the case and reported a true
bill, and on Friday the accused, who had
previously been arrested, Was brought into
Court and entereda plea Of guilty. The facts
are about as follows: On tine Sd OF December
three very fine heiferE were missed from the
farm Of Q. K. WOlcott, Esq. Mr.. Wolcott i'm
medistely advertised the missing cattle in
the CHRONICLE. Shortly after he received a
letter rom a gentleman in Newton, inform
ngbim that attleanswering the description
given hal been offered for sale 70 the writer,
and had actually been sold in the neighbor-
hood. Mr.. Wolcott Immediately proceeded
- ----+-, ,.l ~r.-a -,4 -,-,I, l--.-s-eF,- -
the vendor as satisfied him that Schremer-
horn was the guilty party. He was thereup-
on arrested, and admitted the crime. He
was brought before the Court for sentence
Saturday morning, and after remarks by
the Prosecutor and E. II. Ensign, Esq, APP
pearing for the prisoner, Judge Tuttle. in i'm
pressive words, sentenced the accused 10 one
wears Imprisonment in tho Penitentiary and
TO pay costs, the sentence being thus put At
the lowest term allowed by the statute, on
account Of the youth Of the prisoner, and in
hope IL this experience would prove a sal
utary lesson.
The case OF A r. Wilbur vs. Ebenezor Jack
son ct al, in trespass for entering PLAINTIFF
lands and telling trees was tried Saturday.
! Plaintiff claimed 500 damage, and received
a verdict for $50. R. b. Barnes and Z. B
Taylor for PLAINTIFF; Fuller & Moses for de.
PENDANTS.
Morris, Alexander & Cows GotIeip Kramer
was tried to the Court, Judge Sutlif appear
ing for the plaintiffs and Judge GIidden fol
the defendant. The Court ordered petition
dismissed. Plaintiffs gave notice Of appeal
4 VIII case, on appeal from the Probat,
/ Court, was also tried TO the Court, involving
] the viii OF Benz. Pnlsifer deceased. Decision
reserved.
Two divorce cases were tried Saturda!
afternoon. One was Margaret Thomas v
| Lewis Thomas, on charge Of neglect Of duty
&c. E. H. Ensign appeared for petitioner
whose prayer was granted. The other wa
Eliza Snyder vs. John Snyder. grounds al
legged, wilfun absence for three years an,
neglect Of duty in not providing for com
~plainant. Hutchins and Spear appeared 70
petitioner, ndTaylOr & Jones for defendant
though no active defence was made. Divorc
granted and petitioner restored TO forme
name Of Eliza Humason.
Monday morning, 18th, the Court an
nounced n decision in the case Of Bssset '
Bundy et al, which was substantially for tn
~defendantG Plaintiff gave notice of appea
The case of John Fee VS. Jas. r. Lamb wa
? then taken up. Plaintiff claimed 500 dam
ace for alleged fraud and breach Of warrant
in a trade for a horse. He traded a buggy
) harness, and barrel Of Mecca oil for a mar
which he alleges defendant knew wa
sprained and vet warranted her sound De
lenoanl denies both clalmS- Fuller q Moss
! Tor ANTI Orchard & Ensign for defent
ant. verdict FOR plaintiff for $500
The case OF Esslsa Clsrk-vs higgins ct q
was commences Monday evening.
OOTTecfoR.-fn reporting theSheTeton cas-
two weeks since, by 8 mistake, the name
Hon. Jno. +. Beaver. one OF the counsel II
the defence, Has omitted. We intend this
Our -anOrt Of Court prOceHdiup4 cboU -o-
no injustice TO either parties or attorney
and we regret thE mistake in this case =
the more from the fact thar AF. Beaver w
prominent, not only in the preparation
? the case, but in stating the defence to Il
: jury At n outset, and in the final argUme
i Of b case, In fact we do no injustice to Il
other able attorneys appearing for the d
4 fendant when We say that his triumphal
acquiftai Was in no small measure q
> Mr.. BIS thorough preparation and master,
4 handling Of the defence.