The weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 186?-1869, 1869-06-23

-Ybe Court met at the usuai houi' al ''o
Judges present. I'D
Nelson cs Blue, Robson County. w.
Mel. Mckay, for Plaintiff. No counsel for
Defendant.
State cs. Haughton, New Hanover County.
p Odds, Acting Attorney General, for the
ctote No counsel for Defendant.
Murphy cs. Merritt, Sampson County.
pobert Strange, for Plaintiff. No counsel
for Defendant.
Groom Us. Morrisey, Moore County. A''
tiOn for penalty against defendant as cie,N'
n Mckay and Naming for Defendant nv
counsel for Plsintif.
McNeill and Others Us. Morrison ana
others. Debt on bond OF cierk oi Moore
County Court. Manning and n. Mckay
for Plaintiff and Hon. Samuel j. PERSON for
Defendant.
,.sn,i.s on the ground of want of jurisdic-
tion in the Court below. N. Mckay for
4 Deendant. No counsel for Plaintiff.
Allen rs. Grady. Judgment of compro-
mise. R. H. Battle, for Plaintiff and N.
Mckay for Defendant.
SUPREME COURT, Tuesday June Is, 1869,
The Court met at the usual hour, all the
Judges present.
In tie matter of the protesting lawyers,
the following was read:
In the matter of B. F. MOORE, ESQ.,, and
Others Pearson, G. j.
AS there seems to be some misapprehen-
SION. in regard to the matter, which the
Court is about to take up, it is proper to
say:
The rule was made on the ground that
every member of the Bar, whose name
purports to be signed to the paper, referred
TO in the rule, did sign it and approve of
its publication.
members of the Bar, and the clerk reports
that the names OF ITO purport TO be signed
to the paper-one fifth of the whole number.
He also reports that Willis Bagley, Esq,
has fled a statement to the effect that he
: did not sign the paper, or authorize any
person to do so for him, and that he did not
approve of Its publication. The rule is
therefore discharged as to said Willis Bag
ley and it will be discharged as to all 9TH
ers who may file with the clerk like state
s ment.
The clerk further reports that 101 men,
bers of the Bar had an appearance at the
last term of the Court. Of these, rs did
i not sign the paper. The names of 20 pur-
/ port to be signed to it-one-fourth of the
whole number.
For the purpose of showing that the JUS
tees have no disposition to carry matters to
an extreme, or to do more than what is, in
their opinion, necessary to preserve the re-
zect due to the Court by its officers, and
to prevent its usefulness from being impair
ed, they can do no less. without betraying
the confidence reposed in them by the peo
pie of the State. And for the sake of avoid
iag useless costs, the clerk was instructed to
issue copies only to Mr.. Moore, Mr.. Bragg,
and Mr.. Haywood, in the first instance, with
the hope that further action in respect to
others, might become unnecessary. Other
wise copies will issue, and day given to
them.
The Clerk will enter this upon the record
The matter of B. F. Moore, Esq, will now
be taken up. The Clerk will read the rule,
and the paper referred to in it.
Hon. D. G. Fowie rose and addressed the
Court.
Chief Justice Pearson informed Mr. Fowle
that no intervention of the Bar was necessa-
~, as Mr.. Moore would appear personally.
Ear,lo all tba1 he do,;rod ~
remark that Mr. Moore had prepared an an
swer and placed it in the hands of Hon.
David A. Barnes and Hon. W. N. a. Smith,
who had not yet appeared in Court.
The case was postponed until II o'clock.
When the hour arrived an argument was
progressing and the case was further post
pOned until o'clock this morning.
The following cases were argued:
T. Robert Simpson VS.. W. H. Simpson, Union
county. Ashe for Plaintiff Wilson for de.
fendant.
Thomas Robinson, Executor, vs. Henry
MeIEer, ct. al Richmond county. Messrs.
Battle and Sons and Ashe for Plaintiff. Hins-
dale and Person for Defendant. This is an
important case, involving the construction
ofthe viii of Henry w. Harrington, deceased.
SUPREME Court, June 18th, 1862 The
Court met at the usual hour, all the Judges
present.
Chief Justice Pearson called the case Of
ID. F. Moore.
Mr.. Moore rose and said: desire, may il
please the Court, to make an apology fol
my absence yesterday morning. was moi
hpprised that the case would be taken ur
until 10 o'clock and 1 appeared at that
time. My answer, sir, is in the hands Of
My counsel.
Messrs. W. Fl. Battle, D. G.. Fowle, s. J
Pearson, D. A. Barnes and W. N. 81. Smith
appeared as counsel for Mr.. Moore Mr.
Battle read the following answer:
In the Supreme Court, June Term, 1869.
IN the matter of B. F. Moore, Thomas Bragg
and Edward Graham Haywood.
The several answer of B. F. Moore to the
fule herein made by said Court and served
Upon him.
This respondent protesting that rule
Fhich deprives him, even temporarily, oil
bis privileges as an attorney of said Court
ought not to have been made IN his alb
Fsnce, without notice, and without affidavit,
Tupon the legal proof of the facts upon
which said rule is based, respectfully an
eBas:
l. That he admits the signing and pub
fishing of the paper called IA Solemn pro-