New-York tribune., 1868-02-15

a night stated to the Court yesterday morning that fney
stood for te defendant and three fer plaintiff ana
sharged n" e Albef Matthew and r Johnson for plaintiff
Mr. smith and ex-Judge siosson for defendants. N
Suit was brought by the Government to con-
inf East sI Ryer These esablishmens ae
among the largest aud most valuable In this country
Blasdel aud John c. Ecktl Of the Cnnningham-Burdeu
murder noorety The actual nesrns of the estab
shments 20 the Collector for taxes ayersged about oo
per day Collector Bailey sezsdfhem IN Noyeber last nj
which time the dstilcry was running Win closed aooIs
and the Collector was obliged 10 force an entrance
About 20 we're found inside. who had apparently
been at work. and there indications that dstllrd
Spirit. Ss1 Sse% rhrS n 50 dsan forced
into the rectifing confirmed th
y OF spirs and also an underpipo being discovered
which led from one building TO tie Other The case is
still on trial
In the Bankruptcy branch OF the District
Conr yesterday. interesting question was decided by
Judge Batchfori. ON the petition of Francis ~ aud VIM
there were no individual debts all the copurnerhp
debts contracted In thi. city, Francis Prnnkard
Eastern ns" District Of NsSYork The question was whether
this court had jurisdiction 10 ndudge both petitions 10 be
that WIN C. must die his petition in tho Eastern Dis
ric aud be- further says that the pe,on shows that
when the e"pnrtner"hip debts set forth in the schedules
contracted aud that the members vt the firm are
bankrupt Jointly aud individually aud therefore. no pro-
ceedncs can b had on the petition Of the Prnkards.
unless Marshall Joins with them untl ne u Drought IN Dy
q
At the Fourth District Civil Court yesterday,
before Justice Gale and jury Of three suit was heard
10 recover tl of s2S The painfil r. W. CArfil h-
stituted this suit on behalf OF MS lister ay 0rro' r
personally. IL appears That the defendants, the ~
1885 Inserted an advertisement in The S newspaper for
experienced skirt hands offering good wages ana stating
Who areoimplished the greatest amount work The
plain. q seamStress In tue employ of the deendanis
WAS thus inced to labor far severely than She
would otherwise have done, In the hope OF obtain
ing q reward. At the end OF ten weeks
after tho advertisement appeared. she was inforhed
by the foreman Mr. Henshaw that she had gained the
second pTze s25 On applying To Mr. Kelley he dld rot
deny the truth If this statement, and she was led 10 ex-
pcct payment uf this Some difficulty occurring IN
The embellishments Miss Carroll In company with others
Of the employees In the establishment snce which time
che has vaiily sought for payment of the money; hence
tho present suit Aetyistanding the deiendsnts M m%y
Ing That the suit be dismissed on the grounds OF hele be
Ing evidence 0f contract ana that tho panti was not
the real party in this case and that there was no mention
Of rs second, third class prizes the Jury iOunu Tor
the plaintiff for the full sum OF SO Claimed.
In the Superior Court, yesterday. the suit OF
John TIA h9iy nrad ngss y, hs hese Rmaey Went 10
fhe Metropolitan Hotel owned by the defendants the
gth Of April las aud his gold watch aud
H. and he supposed, bolted the door though u snDso
onenty appeared that the bolt would not fasten aud
placed bis atrh and money under his head In the
morning the door open. and the watch and money
gone lie w<nt down siairs complain. aud return
ng found that tie wnllet minus tho money bad been
into his during his absence the deisndahts
claimed that under the law Of 1885, which provides that
where huelkeep per keeps safe, and puts up notice
recurring guests deposit their Yauables In ~ they
are not abr the Court held that the statute d not
apply to article Of constant use such rs watch nor
10 u travellers mere sfendingmoney. The defendants
then put In evidence TO show that they had
taken oil proper precautions for their
guests safety; had placed patent lock aud bolt
on the door aud that the only other openings into the
room were a veniilatng window the door (Which
could not be opened than eight inche ana CIR
Cular Widow looking down wall OF five stories The
plantf showed thai he bolt woui not fasten the door
The Judge charged THAT the defendants were not liable
they took a proper precautions for the fHiey Oi eir
gucst liable II the of tho goods was Negligent
i'm any particular The jury found In favor Of the
plaintiff for his full claim. S42j a. Mr. Fitch moved Tor
"a reversal Of the Judgment the Judges mnutes'
This motion will be heard hereafter Mr. Baester for
plaintiffs