New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-01-28
LAW LYTELLIGENCE.
THE CIVIL COURTS.

THE CIVIL COURTS.
Petitions in bankruptcy were fled yesterday
by Putnam f. Sp2udng, Richard Wetzol, and MittcA L.
Kidd Of this city.
Mr.. Joseph W. Bartlett, proprietor of the
Bartlett seWngMachnes. and whose oice Is at No. c59
Broadway requests us 10 ray that lie s not tue J0sepn
W. Bartlett that recently presented petition In the court
OF Bankruptcy.
In fine l.. 8. Circuit. BROOKLYN, yesterday, be-
fore Justice Benedict the against John Deyln for
alleged whisky frauds, postponed until to-day. on
motion OF deiendants counsel Inc DistIet
Dovn Tappan and even In consequence OF the absence
them Defendants counsel objected so short notice
but the Court ruled that other e1nst =, De cposeo
In the Brooklyn City Court, before Judge
Thompson. question Of sharp practice arose The case
that Of Robert L. Woods against George Werner on
$500 IN Va S"tviibsandn ne fins me plaintifs AT.
orney entered up Judgment and Issued execution and
bond defendants goods whereupon the uelen9st Oh
not be vacated The court vacated the order with $40
costs, to be paid by plaintiff to defendants attorney
within five days.
a curious curious case has been on trial in Bangor,
Me- before the Supreme Court sophia DOane claims
dnnages Of BENJAMIN W Davis for breaking into her pr
burial lot and injurng IT, She alleges that she made
all the necessary for the funeral OF her son
1900 aud paid all the necessary bills at the request OF
her sons widow but the defendant. with force and arms,
put tie body INTO another coffin using herrobc employed
another minister and buried the body IN another place
Defendant claims to have acted by direction OF tie
widow. and selcctman OF Burlington, and to have
buried the body n proper place The trial occupied
four days. aud decided in favor OF defendant.
Plaintiff nlCd motion FOR a new trial
The United States Supreme Court yesterday
affirmed the decision OF the District Court for Texas rea-
tive 20 the Musna land claim, which had been on the SUI
pTcc Court docket at least Il years u may be recOl
lgS.,a ,, , III Hons ~ DEMONSTRATORS win impeach
able oenses, aud that much testimony was taken upon
that subject. The question: however was not concluded
by Cougress Tie opinion announced yesterday sustans
him IN an particulars The Court also decided case on
appeal. announcing the principle Of maritime law 10 be
that the master Of vessel has right sell his ship
foreign port when IL be established that there Is
necessity for doing so to secure the Interests OF All par
ties interested.
A divorce case between Porter Fitch and
Louisa A. Fitch up recently motion To compel
the defendants counsel. Mr. ketehnn 10 withdraw the
letters, written by her 10 him That motion was denied
The plaintiff subsequently offered the defendants counsel
the action. MI Ketchum refused unless plaintiff would
eapu"os ction Tbis was Serncd and the plainta
now moves To compel him to discontinue. on this mo
ton be read afdays TO negative collision and TO show
that lis W.fes action IN Withdrawing her defense was
free ~ all extraue0us influence Plaintiffs counsel also
averre that they had discovered grounds of divorce
The held that where had been sworn to-
attempt to withdraw 10 tainted with suspicion
that nothing could justify the withdrawal Of the case
from public trail that new matter could be set up IN
supplemental complaint if proper case was made. Mo
/ tiOn denied.
Daniel Sweeney shipped as fireman on
board the steamship North America at $50 month for
voyage 10 Rio and back Two days after leaving tins
port having taken sick he put In hospital at ST.
Thomas and his expenses were paid by the owners lie
was subsequently piouBt nome py ahoher NeSsel owned
the United District Court 10 full months
wages Tie owners claim that Sweeney was not lit for
duty when he joined tho vessel and that therefore he
has claim for wages. Decision reserved
j Jewett and another, owners Of the bark Almena,
sued the Court 20 recover for damages sustained
their vessel while being tOwed by the Yankee Boy in
She struck on rock below Blackwers Island and was
damaged to the extent OF $500 The beants charge the
damages to the nfuness OF the hands on the Yankee
Boy and seek to hold the tug responsible The owners OF
n gs y 81 and on throw s Same those
eSnSs the . bark ps sSS s .SsssysS
! In 1s47, Amelia Warner and her husband sepa-
rated seyen years Of married life. In 1854 Mrs.
Warner married Samuel F. Appleton who shortly after
ward became insane. Dir. Warner, the first husband,
then appeared, aud action in the Supreme Court
commenced IN MIR. Appletons name 10 annnl the mar
riage with Mrs Appleton. or Mrs. Warner The case is
complicated by these dates: The marriage solem-
ized on March TO- 1854 In the previous February Mrs
Warner had commenced u suit IN Indiana for divorce,
and did not get decree in her favor until April &C. The
entry of she marriage IN 81 stephens register not
to have been made uuti June, and then entered
having taken place on April 81 IL was argued that this
OF her fret husband and therefore that her subsequent
marriage was absolutely void The case was mp as
commended that the plaintiff being insane could not make
that election which was necessary to bring an action for
judge Cardozo reserved his decision.
Judge Cardozo has decided in the Chicago
and Rock Island Railroad dispute that party may be
10 obtain obtain adayits 10 be used motions that
u ishng" examination Is not proper but merely an
within the knowledge Of the person examined, and
necessary To the notion that the correct practice IL
Ia first prepare affidavit and present 1t to the party
whose deposition Ia desired before applying for order
under section IO though such matter Is ursdc-
tOnal that the failure in this to such a
dayt has been waived by the neglect OF the party
amined To refuse 10 testify that ground that the
whole matter is In the discretion Of the Court and under
this motion no examination OF the books can be had
Mr. Maryn's refusal sign the affidavit rendered him
without specifying reason demands that the order
against him stand AS to Tracy. Dows lows. the Court
docs not directly pass their refusal to
tain questions but In counsel cannot promises
10 make formal decision each question The right
90 PIT OF these questions may involve the ners Of
the action the consideration OF which the Judge desires
topostponc until the main questions are fully argued
before him.