The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-06-29
THE COURTS.

pesday has been engaged in tho trial Of the
csse OF James T. Campbell VS.. the Hone IN
surance Company. yMessrs. Wilkinson d Gil
christ for plalntiif, and Messrs. Slmons i
Simons for defendant. The points involved
were these: The plaintiff had insured ID the
DEFENDANTS company, through its agent here,
and bad suffered loss. he claimed two thou
send dollars, but afterwards, on compromise,
the amount was settled between him sud tie
company at some sixteen hundred dollars. In
the meantime certain OF his creditors eaed hin
in a a;tachment in New York, and The funds or
interes. Of Mr. Campbell was attached in the
bands of the Insurance Company. Judsmcnts
were recovered against Mr. Campbell. IN New
York, and on this the Insurance Company pad
;the money. Thus suit was brought to recover
the money on the policy. In his charge to th :
.;ury the Judge considered three points: First,
whether the plaint,f :coul1 reoover the whois
amount Of th. policy, on tho ground q a total
loss. after thu arrangement .abo7e mentioned;
second, whetherian uaadjusted claim, under q
policy OF insurance; was such property as could
be attached under the laws OF Now York; aud
third. whether the insurance Company was
bound by ths judgments against Mr. campbell
d, the attachment salts in Now Yord.
The Judge charged the jury on ths first
point that unless ta aie was fraud on tho part
Of the Compan:, in the making Of the arrange
ment and adjastmsnt, that would be the
amount in whioa tn, Company would be liable;
but Of this there appeared TO be no proof. Ga
tho second poias, that although there was diff
eu.ty on this subject. he would not charge thai
twas not such an interest as might be attached
under the New York la1. 80
AS to the third point, tc charged that it did
not appear from the records OF the proceed
,ings, in the, attached cases in New Y:rk, low
the Insurance Company was coancc:ol With
those suits. That there -wes no return by the
Sheriff apparent in the records that he hal
served the process ON the Company or'its OFF,
Ger. Thai these JUDGMENTS. therefore, cc1ld
not be set mp as dafenss OF ths COMPANY. A.
thoughit appeared by the evidsace admitted
on the trial that thu Company had been served
with the warrants of, attachment, this fac:
being pro-ed.by its officers who wsss sarved,
and by the Deputy SasfiR who acsualiJ
made the soryiee;. aad rlthoush it was
also proved '-byaiiawyers of position in
New Yo.k, md, the evidence on this point
admitted, it is not.r,garded as jurisdiotiona';
that the return rnlght be made at any stage OF
the proceedings which might suit the conye-
niencs Of the officer or any cs the pait es. and
that in practice but little attention.was paid to
tlhes making of this return, and compliance
with the statuto in this respect not being re-
gardsd as iurisdictional.;a1d anou-compliancs
being regarded AID treated as being al irregu-
larity merely. It was fu-'her proved by these
lawyers, although their evidence was exclnled
by tho Judge, that il the service CT tie "ar-
rants Of attachment ware proved, which was
done in this case, the liability OF, the company
as garnishees became fixed and complete ac-
cordins to the laws Of New York. :. a. -
"a verdict was rendered against the defend-
ants, who, We understand, have appealed.
CoUHr OF GENERAL SESSIONS AND COMMON
PLEAs-HoN.i THos.aw. GLOVER, PRESIDING. :
Saturday having been appointed sentence day,
Samuel Ross and Robert Ross (colored), con-
yicted OF larceny under the statute, were
brought to the bar OF tho Court and sentenced
to be each confined in the peuitontiary OF bnrd
labor for eight yers The larceny charged was
the stealing Of several. l.cows and other property
from G. ". shing,er. at Goose Creek, in Janu-
ary last.
Tho contingent docket was called and the
Court adjourned.