, 1869-06-17

Superior Court.
George q. Gibson Ct a! :. ciJ Of Chicago yer.
Dict, defendant guilty. DamaEta Assessed .. $500
Thts was The acuon brought hy G4.,son S'nase
10 lave been Sustained By the rnluB u sand IN
fruit Of their once Premises during the building
OF ne msshtoa stsee! .aaael
rcrhct for pi2intt1. win 81 ,oNsQ This Il tae
suit mentioned yesterday, hesc rtsinstn sued rs
. dcrrcttre, claiming thst, under erplosment BY
r.sl W.ai,ea!dcs, The detAuiie1-
~ 1h{IhEt TING CACSI
E1lsh2 ", Cole :. Iutsed States EIrrrsN Com
ra:.. IN inc es:h tsy of November, Isas pl.ln
TN iie.s1cTrd in GM cAxo 70 tat s1psess eonpanJ.
lacAate to be conssgei To New tofk, he Iepss
STATS .1r.i-, each Ipr sI.0A. The packasc EaS
natAed 10 be OF The <niue Of AHA IL HooM
aetta that tic package sInvcd 10 due Course
eons's.ce, to au urpearxncc u sood order. there
lt.rT CO Ca4rks ~ !aaicsie thai II had been tam.
ss. psS1 T1sn ~ con oen.rs tho rsekasc r. ca
sEues !oEsu The tue oonlk, with lektef from tEe
plalENa stating that he had enclosed nyc bonds,
eaca Fepteeeht'oE thousand dollars, On irquly
| found Of The tFu t,ouds sl(-rr.i m ~ n,isstnr
Plaintiff now elatms thar hr did cuciosc nyr
lcnds md he brings his action u recover for the
| Two which he alleys nc1c lost.
This c2se viii false some tics Questions Of law
The tstieulants claim thai 1e }ar, must pe eat-
plaintiff Uisrcprtkented the actual yatns nr tsc
contents OF the package In orlel 70 AsoLi tae nav.
I ment Of IG2soEAhle charges VI their tmp,o{mntit
ihrD thefc W4s, IN i4H. positive lEaud, ~hcrrGore
| defendant woul1 b. relieved from responsibility
undev liability ~ common carrier. De-
cause In order to affect defendant xs snch con.
I non carrier he NUS: be tsea;ed In good fAith,
! and any 1A1se statement or unfair eouccalntat
whtrcby the carrier was tnlAed. must relieve him
! at flalllity. II Ia lAo cenNuded teAt poststFe
negligence or l1AllcA&anC6 Oh Ghe pa{t OF the De
fcrnant must he proved tn oEdeg 10 Ch1rgc lin
Win The alleged loss and that the burden Of p:po1
tD this matter Is OF The pt2nu, md thA8 It is uol
| Sufficient to show even that there Wns theft fnt
that Of ltkelf estAhliAhcs neaer responsibility ol
5rtspons,tilsy, a. It does not Ah4ptuye the use o
ordinary c:::sence- On TRIAL
| 1rDCNKHn .---
Harriet c. naJte1a y. MenIy IL H3pp~ For f30s
&C ". Bailey :. George II. Sloan For defend
11t.
NEW sErTS
Aaron Daube :. Nelson Aorr.a Assaa7s.t De
nnrd, tlr0n
tirand Trunk r. v. Co. OF Canada ', Ch,i,t,a,
Re.nUItn- Debt t9oa Damages $3aL
| rIBFAss
Mkrsa 4 Lincoln and husband And SuHaa 7
! Avery and husband r. Peter non2mIe- Trt4pass
Damages Laid 1t r, 0o0, with odpt1s In aid tn,
fercal plaintiffs e.aIm 10 oEn the premises Nos
50, 81 and 81 Quincy Street with 1easenold lntetes
IN the lo1A. Ther charge that defendant lmWop
| CRY tore down their rest fcuce, drove o6 som
! carpenters that were II Wo1k upon IT, and ejecte'
| the aRcnt Of dc:cncxnta John Lincoln. threaten
| Ing 70 knock It's btatna out II he returned
| pErpRCE
/ Nickel Veins =. Angela He.nA PHI for divorces
II Is kv:t thet the parties were married on the ~
tay Ct * r.cu.s.!, 1855, It Jnlitf. II i caar-t
tins H. tls.le4l GnlcaCo III J1n7a7J. Ii"
| lrd p4ssed 1ue meek III indse111lEote HTpa
acilS aod that o. The less cAy Of f7assA5 "a