The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1868-11-02

Lodge Knights Of Pythiss, OF the state OF MI
! rylsnd. which were buried at ten o'clock vel
take the train were Grand Chancellor j, III
King, Vice Grand Chancellor Or. Caustir
Grand Reeerdins scribe q; b; Barton, Gran,
Thomas Snlnnn, Grand Guide J. W, Thorn
son, Grand Inner Steward John Eaveiy, CRAM
Outer Steward Mr.. Strobel, Grand Vice Patri
arch, VIM. p. westwood.
FuRLouon...Owingto a slack OF work, som,
Government bindery on Saturday,
l+ THE COURTS. r,r ...
SurREMg CoyRT- General term.--Chief Jus
tiee Cartier and Justices olin and Wylie sal
ATToRsErs ADMITTED.
On the motion Of M Thompson, Seth =. Bar.
mltted to practice at tho bar OF this court.
On the favorable report oi NJ. Thompson
and others, examining committee, Frank Trigg
j was admitted as q member Of the bar.
oosFiscATloN CASE DECIDED.
Tylerys Defrecs. This ease comes up on spe-
ciai verdict and motion for Judgment heard, In
the arst inatance, In the general term. The facts
| Of the case, with the argument thereon, have
Already been reported In this paper. J; d;
De,ress owns house purchased n at ajHdiSsl
Court under the conHscation act, and Tyler
now brings ejectment to Dust Defrccs from
auder Ike ssosa a sale Tssr responds
that no Court had 8 right to pass the title OF
the property unless after the verdict OF jury,
and that the Court could have no Jurisdiction
In this case because no notice had been given
Gated.
| Uhief Justice Cartier pron6uuted the unau.
~; TSs defence ssa sssasS isss iSs pro.
miralty, which had no jury, and as II was not
| possible to pass the title TO- real estate with.
out q jury to nad the facts, therefore that
sale under them void. But In this view they
had neglected to notice the fact that the Dis.
trict Court had revenue as well as admiralty
peared there was nothing to show that Jury
would not have been empanneled In the Dis
trict Court. But his default In appearing rem.
as the foundation Of decree OF conascation
stood confessed. The second objection, that
the defendant (Tylcrl had not been notlhed,
was without force. The seizure OF tho prop
erty and the notice which accompanied II was
all the notice the statute required. The Cour'
did not notice the argument as to the cnusti- |
BY one OF the counsel, near the close of the
argument, and the Court were fully satisfied
on the subject. The Court therefore ordered
that judgment be entered for the defendant.
A LANDLORD AND TENANT CASE DECIDED.
Caroline Moreland VS.. witty Y. Harris.
This Is a case under the landlord and tenant
act, and was brought, In the flrst instance be-
fore n justice, and then transferred to the Cir.
cult Court, whence 1t came up TO this court
Court, which had given Judgment for the de.
PENDANT.
Inc appellant, Mrs. Morcland, rented to the
ns ,osn "a SSy asS ths, sSoud MISE
Harris, at the expiration OF six months, de-
liz siaSt p, ."c cantInning The Lease for six
months longer. At the expiration OF the hfst
six months, and on the day the rent became
nre, iae rentea, and the amount due being
sgreeJ upon' demand was made therefor, hut
as.rnaat 80. ~ =, "a ~ the time Ifnder
.n s an aetian 70 si,possess
Miss Harris of the rented premises was en- |
tered. and eomes "a" into the General term as
y.ph"rson and S,,I.o, ftor a,nellan, ar
nS ~ ~, an e ian.a -, thn ieapspe hv ,vbich
n wa. ss,ees thet n Tsrpis shouiI desire she
might Keep the house an aaai'ionai SIX TX
Sh was n,aS ~ ,or ny tho a., az
wnlch the mouse was ran.eu iSr an sarnnN
months. That peing mus aisunut nsree
meht; anu eohsututing no pAr, y, me ,aran
ioI SIX moh'hs, ~ Was w us .g. as,i AZ
a W., on tne Soh nr . wss Main 70 RSTs ait
ste' me RUE OF law was pia,n Y paro, o. ~
anu hreh. oiyi heau w. I'M oaertns 81 an
IEh. oi party uepeu,us un my eXe not,ce Of
optioh, lhe other parry mus my no,.ss "
the discrimination mhue. pun nhts M'Si,
~ any time, gave M0reihnu nosuu ,nns s ~
light to hold csa.eG at the expiration o. the
nrst ak months. "a. ihat the REM ueihs uo,
manded, taithough not on tne ptemisesl nnu
there having been iailure 70 pay " hIiHhtoi
re-entry or Of disposses,ing Miss harsis mere,
upon accrued to Mrs: Morelana; ihe eouIt
below had ruled that the demand iot Leht mus'
be made on the premises, out TINS inc "PPei-
liant thought error.
The appellee 10y N. Ihompson. epntenueu
that the lease did NOT ptoviue that w nsspt
shouil re-enter, OF thnt tne aa nsn ~
should cease upon ofehoh o. any eVfen aal1 ~
inc leasei thefe was, theteiote, ~ ,soa sho,iJ
Ihere was no PROVISION tnat .ne a. Peht
give notiee o. hef uesiIe 70 ene N, ne . .bS
Of keeping the premises aulins M wy, ot,aa
Term OF SIX months5 pu. t suS unaos 4,
necessary, any iotletuie neetuips my 49, ~
was waiVeu ht, W the ianso v, ~ w ~ a..
70 re-enter the ptemlses ~ .ne enu ~ Wv ~ ~
| SIX months, ana tnen anu ,neio ~ 49, ~ t
demand the preese anount o. ,eHt NY NY, Z" ,ha
convenlent time oeiore sunset On liz Iy ,I ~
rent became due ~ the most Puoho Pi"ee III
he demiseu preniises. A., Aha ,our, hal
4, wi. Justieo I'm sa . ~ ,naninn"s
ulrecteu him 70 Ptohouhoe ~ y ~ 1850
opinion s r the NO forfeiture
oeioW' IheIe eouiu nay ~ zen e.sa "a cans.. |
As I common law IN WIS eaae au aoUand
gently no necessary iof epnino NY Az nnt an
on inc premises, SCI 10, 'ho e rs ntIan uSss
pehu on lhe eonmon Jaw, ny 1890 , W." as
brought nnler the iahaioru anu uhn Nv a. IT,
anu the nrt lues'ipn was, m.d sa,,a ~ IN
Ieram,t o. ,o ,he ronin.vment or rent The pro
ueihu,s 10. ~ III tatmt. gsye In .nch .a.e.
eeeding when tae s. s gaye IN ssG IN eeI
VA 30 rnpan,,r srhif nayment ,vs,c moi
wahou i 40 a. nossessi"5 wonIi follow
Tha .yscnnh nnestion was whether the lease
ing seGonu quessth a nxn,rsttnn nf The Nrst
hAu .ei M, ~ 'me ". sootenh that he
oa,sn ths LA 40 nroy iIri III at the Lessee could
Snu I ane ~. ~ sscnnS six montbs If sbe de-
HOlu over htSuuu oiA ihohth'i