, 1869-06-04
The COURTS Of lA1 AND EQUITY.

] -
II was understood that the happy advent Of the
associate Joige Of the Supreme Court would
Saa9 sa s sSe Z esu Sns soa
which have been submitted 70 him. In The pres
n1 ss1s Ss Es !saaa Tasse -
stated taey are both engaged with a tur1 IN th1
| LONG CONTESTED cACsx
Richard Gregg + Wfliam s. Mosa- Assumpstt
tn tns rst IT! there xss yerd1ss 20 elain5n
Eighteen ss9 mi shs S5,ss =
she building of the ri,ws, from M Fsara ETC to Ruoy s =
fns psss R q II IL IL rrsa ss1 ~
Rte sna !sn d 's ~ "a n't ns
her Of the frm. He, ~ did his copartners, ad-
s ey :e f Waen e.
] defendant, who were the nnaneiai mansgers ii
H. : e h lens Fl re osn 3!
partners Of the concern upon their PERSONAL
Responsibility mi upon thei1 sepsEa.e aid Joint
Deeenher. 1874. The defence ts Inst tic money.
TO, thns It was cancelled by q suhseduent s1ree
ment. which srsps away the original Investment,
nndsr ne purchase Of tae franchise o1 he road b5
pan,. On trtz, and likely to occopy my auaount
of time not 10 exceed nTc CaJA
rNAwfSG Y1NE LNEl
In the case OF DpukIc et al. =, worcester r. NJ.
y Eceds satpPsi ron Ser Eots % 70 tiisnaanss. a
IL New YORK snbs.,guent to lie making of an an
~ qsylf upon, which a defant naS se< ABIDE.
of osar seforr sna s ans, xere 1as
saes IS sfSy r. II, FL M
tie State Of New York" etc. The Omission fey{.
DENLY e'ertcaD dtl not state That lie witnesses @
Ing sscs tssen in dvrreatfan Of lie common NV,
boiMns 10 70 be p'tsune.t In their fasor Dat can.
nIe:e lsl,s:,ietton must appear Thc objection was
WHEN IS 4 rrrso ckrr.1y.
E1re Insurance COMPANY. '. lIibbara / Spencer
THIS Is IN action brought upon prcmluul Nnsn1-
ansel s note, io5 au asetNee in bankruptcy, bv
,aesn n,sGne1e1 q Dnpee "ho deeaszed opon tas fol-
II: ssEs s. Il: e sssy r. as, i e Az.
eees sy.sy = Il oh1.f -
sees7, q 1ad eemlsry may aeeaby 70 .he set of
NJ. Clsrxson delnnred rhat this was not a
prnIa!s'J note. Claiming that Was not certain n
not certain 10 The time Of peJment and. ,a",,v'
tnnt !. y e9nanI uncertain tn relation to ths faes
Ths Court Iecdvet to overu,e the dep,n,rrr /
out did no: heshle a 70 WHISTLER the INSTRUMENT !
E&s techhicanv. pFpEnis*ory note Tiers /
setts,n portion oi :he som sarred 10 tss t. pa d. IS
PAID according 70 the companys chsstef. ths !
voole became due, Hence there was . liked AMI !
ss.1stn ST. faI d. ast non q, Tasn se ne
vas oyer7uled because the money being psvable .
& % sne insn.apce s1 coDpaay tthe bankrupt, the ;
simply Indicate thai there might be = naymsnt ar
tss inCeey 70 him tn uGuh1auon Of the certain |
Ess n.s,on =, ~ sS Ssopao q pa!ee As 70 tie thtr
msy be male certain In this case, If there VISA
~ uncertainty Is to tas o2ts Of payment that vas +
copTanr acting unIer It's charter, which is puoIIe
AM, declared an ln5:alitoent due upon dav GER
nate ehe certain DAY Of Ihe notes being due, nj
OF which brings alout The trsait that "H defend
1ots uhere are several similar Suits have any
in law upon the contrsct' they must Plead snI
take apen themselves Rae b0rssen ofproof.
In nankFupscy.
Entitled 10 DirAdrae-pewltt C. Rater. of IN.
Tanner. OF Chicago.
Circuit Court.
Sot IN seS1!pn-
Fanny Gamble Y. Thomas s. Ao1ae, Case
gs@asea - sad at g ooo With aop'aa In att- II Is
PCrchsse Of houke, no 3 Walnut street, iluposed
uFou pl4lhu1 worthless securities by Nxy Of no;es |
G. q. aud sunefsa Blactm.a =, Ade,h v !
essa e. s1 u !, w. praying for tae sse q raj
to1 The palposo Of aa1,nyIea.e;ea Seaaeafasd S
Eesk sasassss!oa o. i' oate. Id L.
Hs,s5 9S,5ss Il s*eos vsst & IL ssais
o1AS1 FAMILY oeAx2k1-xxw Wat 10 PAY ON
pEA7A
ess*ea as.s + cS sfna rs, keeS,s1 q, rs ct
sa;iog peculiar ssate of acairs. coMpI.asnt
os. 8, "a hs w. snssssd "a ne oey das
Josn eae e ~ ay Tsa oes sIs 54
tsiay indrced hin % believe tas, a. JOAN said b.
cass ~ sean9 4a nm soods u prtce lower Than LIE
~ ha noaIa s q ,s so;s IN te CIT. var
= asa'nst hn 70 10 eSien; q sz1,3ss ss seIoud
txo stores and tte.F stock md appurssr1aees ~
IS ether lah1i;ues ne u aay eo5.en,sss 10 1sssa9e
saa ta't q e ne h Iseere
sfsnns na5Iit,sss su t ISs5 .oat asn sn ~ oat
ther, not having tnc1ude1 De eps9s III I, Ae
business u bis ll Of rase but hasiurT ~ lrse y. ~
for new loea,it for bcstntss ~ ,sa' sought
io2t days tne defendsnts learning Of his srta; o.
= .se; s.5 non N hes ls e q n7 q
chase The two stores aad otheT n.y., - repaf-
70 fet1aa31T Possession upoo A. rsn5r.Ga1r !
tneE bend q indemnity. thua Iosirr the t,oss " ~
e ~ M 70 themselves by the trade Th.s
osuntardtas to PATHS other mn hts brotnefin.
kcox1ea represented that his partners ciairns.1 :
.nsi tie lcH, which te Ee1fed 70 b. ainnr | :
E4-NH, *ss entirely htA wherefore hr
teoae:seo tnat Complainant bhoaid, n
7fated ihas Although be could not ActuowIed,e
!exal liability In the preni.e1 he would rsu1aise .
eFef Ee became sbie to soxte the smpaat frona
~ cCElnesA without defrtinent to the anne to +
aHafe the iosa John aAked Kim Il he would ptsce
e1ls promise IN writing, aud be assented xnen c
GAthe~ hloxles MAS tns1aeted to dnw up kuch t
naper psptr vas then presented 10 hin. l. i
Which. relying ubon the parties he signed Wlthnnt
teAatn2. He Claims now. ~ ibe end Of pumber !
Ok 1noutha+ to have harmed that ,hev then uns:
sented 70 nlo pEoDissocv note, parahIc eorne
ttEs N lssl. for III. ec0 This note, he si,eesS
.sa oe&Aneta isun hin By frHun wherefore he
tskt N Injunction 10 restrain III ENDORSEMENT ~
:1upsfer, and decree lor It's cancelatinn ~ ~
livery UE Is tactdentauJ c4atu,ed III. he ssose-
ment OF The ostc1n nceouht Mas fajse and th,.
ne frothef-haaw In fact pyerrharTr6 for ths ,
soods which he pretended 70 sel 10 his relasTe -
Inde1 the mAsktt ptace. :
Superior Co4rt.~
Po'emus p, Hamilton '. John l. pu1,. verd.ct
JcndHIsA :
- s11an = . coass~orsa =. aeosse Hur1eus For
NJ cu4sr4aY. -. III
Solomon L sharp '. Tnotnas Csrhne Deeran
temnylnx cloud from title tos south 20 feet n Te
- and II, Block Il, CAzpentsTA Atttt1om
NV sUrf8. 1