Delaware tribune. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1867-1877, 1869-11-25
New Castle County courts.
NOVEMBER TERM, 1869.
MONDAY,

The Grand Jury, which had not been in sessio,
on Saturday, were sent to their chamber.
NoTE.-A misunderstanding made us saw OF
Saturday, that they had finished their business OF
Friday evening.
The Court ordered none pros. to be entered
on the Clerks docket in the case of the State Us
Edward Fortuer charged with arson.
The trial of cases on the civil list was then com
menced.. The first case IN readiness was that s
Heber Jones Us. u. T. Richards. Whiteley fol
plaintiff; Harrington for defendant
Ihls was a suit brought against the defendant
for the recovery of 300 paid by plaintiff under
The following circumstances =
Lewis Fell, of New Garden township, Chester
county, was appointed by the Orphans Court Of
| That county as administrator OF the property OF
Rodman Walker, deceased The personal effects
of the deceased not realizing sufficient to pay
the debts against the estate, an order of Court
| was obtained, and ID. I. Richards EMPLOYED MS
auctioneer TO sell the farm which consisted
| OF sixty-three acres, and was appraised
Mt seven thousand dollars. On the day of sale
| the farm not bringing the desired amount, the
| sale was stopped and the order for sale returned
| as property not sold tor want of bidders. Ar
rapgcments were then made to sell the farm at
private sale, II purchaser could be found for
the full amount of the apprasmcnt. Mr.. Kick
ards meeting with Heber Jones, who was in want
OF arm, took him aud his wife to sec this place.
Mr. Jones had agreed TO give Richards 300 ii he
| could get the farm for him for $1,000. After
selling the farm and agreeing to take 1t at The
price stipulated, he gave Mr. X. his 800, and
afterwards met Mr.. Fell in NewaI K, and gave him
check for $500 to bind the contract, and agreed
TO attend ut another sale of the farm on another
order from the Orphans Court, at which the farm
was o be knocked off to Jones for $1,000
On the day of sale, Jones failed to appear, ac-
cording to the agreement, ana the farm was sold
considerable below its appraised value. Mr.
Jones considering the contract with Richards.
was void because d good title could not be given
ut the time OF contract brings suit 10 recover 800
the amount paid hun. After argument by coun-
sci, the jury returned verdict In favor of the
defendant.
A large number of cases were passed over on
account of the absence of witnesses for whom at-
tachments were taken out.
The next case In readiness was a case of appeal
from Justice of the Peace Docket.
The appeal was taken by Robinson & Bro, 10
m action against james Brown, of Christiana
Hundred, on an assumpsit to pay $3f12 for 70
pairs to q certain carriage. Bird for plaintiff;
Lore for defendant
John Brown testified that he got the carriage
from Robinson u Bro, and that his father paid
S2i0 for it. Robinson u Bro. agreed to do all
necessary repairs for one year free of charge
The first time he rode In il after taking it home,
two OF the spokes fell out, and the third time h,.
used 1t the box got heated and the wheel would
not turn.
John Green and Jos N. Cooling testified that
IL was a uniform custom with coachmakers in
Wilmington to do all necessary repairs to new
carriage for one year.
john Watson testified that he was a coach
blacksmith, that he worked for Robinson & Bro
and made the iron work for the carriage In ques
ton, the work was well done sand had got In
Tho boxes and cut the iron, this loosened the,
spokes and locked the wheels; the carriage had
not been properly creased.
Case argued, and verdict rendered in favor of
the plaintiff. (Brown).
s. N. Pusey rs. &. IL J. Pyle-Gordou for
plaintiff, Patterson for defendants. Action
brought on promissory note for $500. Verdict
for plaintiff for S2657,92 with one months stay
of execution.
Another case of the same character between
the same parties came up. Judgment In favor of |
plaintiff WINS given without trial.
u q. Moore Us. James L. Heverin, Henry |
Todd, and John W. Cullen-Lore for plaintiffs, |
Pennington and Gordon for defendants. Action
brought for $406 % for repairs 10 the steam pro.
peller William Penn. Jury called, ard Court adj |
lourned until Tuesday morning at 10 o'clock.
TUESDAY.
The case of E, 81 G. Moore rs. James L. Hev- |
erin, Henry Todd and John w. Cullen, which |
was in progress when the Court adjourned Oh |
Monday evening, was resumed this morning. |
The counsel for defendants making no defence /
the case was given to the jury, wha returned a |
verdict In favor of the plaintiffs of $467.76.
The Court directed the Clerk of the Peace to /
enter upon the docket u noiis pros In tue case /
of the State rs. Aquilla and George Nebeker for
stand against Samuel A. Nebeker.
The suit OF Seriick f. Shallcross rs. Rufus /
Sker, was called, and being ready trial pro-
ceeded. Spruauce for plaintiff, Whiteley for de-
PENDANT.
The suit was brought by the plaintiff on a war;
ranty of defendant that Jersey Blue Reaper and |
Mower sold to plaintiff in the spring of 1865,
would do its work well, both in grass and grain,
plaintiff giving his note for $40 ia payment tor
the machine, which he AYERS did not come up to
the terms of the warranty, when IL was returned |
to the accredited agent in Middletown, ana suit |
brought to recover from defendant the $40 paid |
for the machine.
The Gaze occupied nearly all day when 1t was
given to the jury who returned verdict in favor
of plaintiff for $199.S5.
The case of Turner, Herbert and Raymond rs.
George g. Cleaver. was called and Jury sworn. |
Harrington for plaintiffs. Gordon and Whitley
for defendant. Plaintiffs do business in Phila-
delphia, and in July, 1867. sold to defendant q
grain thrasher and separator, together with
truck ind wagon for $500 The machine not |
proving satisfactory to defendant payment was |
refused. hence the suit.
George Raymond, one OF the members of the /
firm, produced the original book of entries as evi.
dence. Objected TO by counsel for defendant on
the ground that the Court had in previous case
decided that steam engine, horse, or things OF |
like character, could not be considered articles |
tor book entities, but must be subject to special
contract.
The Court did not consider the articles at issue |
as belonging TO that class of goods and overrued |
the objection. Case continued, and Court adj |
journed until Wednesday morning at 10 O'Clock. |