New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-05-20
CIVIL.

A snt in the Common Pleas between +.
weino and one.werts, IN which the former asked sSO
cuded yesterday, after two-da5s trial The Pamtn Is
an aged woman. She complained that the defendant
struck her with small measure, breaking her breast
bone. The jury allowed her $780,
George Armistead Appleton, esq, Copyright
Clerk OF the District Court for the Southern District q
recently admitted to practice in the Supreme Court OF
this State. was YESTERDAY upon motion Of Charles Dong
hue esq., admitted to practice In all the degrees IN DOM
the u s. Circuit and District Courts OF this District
In the Seventh District Court, yesterday, be-,
fore Justice Stenmar, James W. Harnett sued Mhrsnai
at the disnlery OF Reed Kelly No 657 Thirdsye
Reed Kelly when their dstillery was returned 70 en
on their bonds employed Harnett as Waterman. AT -
day. and paid him at that rate Ia full marsna uIIsy
swore that he dld not employ Harnett Judgment was
rendered for defendant,
In the United States District Court for the
Southern District the fO0wingnaned property was yes
terday condemned by defanlt case OF tobacco found
on pier No a. N r. 5bbls distilled Spirits found at No. "a
New BowSry 10 bbis do SILL &C. found a. EG,inE ss
OF whisky c which proceeded against IN old suits,
also condemned, motion Of Assistant District
Twea1y siItSst; 5bis. &c. nos a and a Mottst
bbs &C., No 232 East Foriieihst stills tanks &c,
beths Ibs nos sg3 and 305 Eighthst; 10 bbls, &c,
st. q bbls. No 2s Pearlst "a bbs &c, No Sal Ninth
st.; 1870 gallons, &c, No. 81 Coumbia-st
The case of Edward Humphrey, in the
Supreme Court. Chambers yesterday developed some
orders Of inquiry as 10 The nnscy Of Edward Humphrey
made by Louis Beach, eneditor. who claimed
her granddaughters and that part Of the nensy
estate OF his father TO which he entitled as heir He
also charged collision and defamation against MIS-
Humphreys attorney The other motion was not brought
on tie dsposing OF both by stating that Judge In
graham had first granted commission dc htHatteo on the
petition OF the creditor and that subsequently, on the
petition OF the representatives Of tho estate he had
granted similar writ TO the same commissioners; ana
both being er as by the same Judge the second super
seeded the first. The creditor was not deprived Oh his
Iig ns Ia
improperly OF Its conduct TO the notce OF tue court ana
If the security his debt was not sufficient he might
move 70 increase Mr. Dawson for the CREDITOR judah
& Dickinson for executor.
Tn the Supreme Court, Chambers, the case of
Morgan !. Smith agt Mary Ann smith which mas been
often before the courts again called The palntiu
in 1886 commenced a suit for divorce against ne vile
being resident Of Kentucky The suit was prosecuted
10 decree which granted In Dec 1870 on the evF
dence given before referee Mrs smith not appearing
Shortly afterward the plainun married lady by whom
lac has since had child ana IN February. 1901 was
appointed Consul to Honolulu. Last Autumn the wne
moved to vacate the decree OF divorce on the ground that
her husband was not citizen OF New fork, put OF
only information about .. was from her husband
who, In December, 1865, told her he had obtained q
arrangement for mutual separation; that took her
little time ~ lind the venue OF the SUIT ana tnat the
postponement on ground that he had only recently
returned from the Sandwich Islands ON hearing Of this
sired were scattered all the West The Court refused
further but gaze vet, the RSrss to the 18th
There were seven or eight motions in the Erie
Railway suits upon the calendar for the Supreme Court
Chambers yesterday When the first was called Mr..
Field answered that the defendants ready There
were three motions under TINS tte and he said he really
could tell which Of the three this was but he an
swered ready. Judge Barnard said he had supposed
these questions depended Judge Sutherands decision
I'm the matters argued before him. and perhaps they had
better be adjourned abide that decision. For himself.
he had no wish that any Of these motions should be
before him at Special Term. Mr. Field said that these
motions distinct in their form from those before
Judge Sutherland though the same principles should
govern BOTH aud no whichever Judge first made
a decision the other woud follow matter OF courtesy,
but he had objection 10 the orders being adjourned
except that desirable that tho appeals from the
decisions shoud be heard at the june General Term and
thrown over to October. IT, therefore, was under
stood that either party desiring to appeal might do so on
one DAYS notice he would have objection. After
discussion between Mr. Field and Mr.. Rapallo it was
settled that the matter should be adjourned 70 the 10th
inst, and in the tme briefs be submitted Judge
Barnard then suggested that the contempt proceedings
be also adjourned TO the same time Mr. Field said Mr.
Eldridge would appear that afternoon and give bail,
which was xed by the Court at $4,000 All proceedings
were then adjourned TO the 26th inst At o'clock Mr.
Hoes on behalf OF the paintis appeared and had Mr..
Eldrldge called, and that gentleman not appearing
pues attachment taken out TO Keep the proceedings
against HIM regular.