Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1869-02-17
TIE COURTS.

MUNICIPAL COURT-GeO. ". WGJdrCa
JUdgs.-Ihe cases disposed Of IN tai;
Court yesterday were as follows:
State vs. Williams, charged with " IN,
iswfuI services OF criminal service
Jury returned 3 verde: Of not guilty.
State vs. MCAujfns, charged with same
CHense. Verdict, not guilty.
The csses for trial tO-dsy are:
1777 State vs. CUsgrOYs.
2l56 same Us BscksC & RIddiEaU.
2 2z55 Same V BksfpE5Rsa.n'
Pop Same va Williams.
2544 70 2i49 Same vs. Fishoc.
2554 TO 2555 Same IS McCSuliy.
1857 10 2572 Same VS. Smith.
Z576 10 1850 same vs. Brown.
POSI- 10 25s5 Same vs. BuTE.
1888 70 255S Same Is Sullivan.
1888 70 2CJl Same vs. G&rysy.
gHANCERY COUNT hEf. Il. Smith
observation-disclosures calendar viii be
taken 1D to-day. The following dscrees
we've flied yesterday
Murray vs. Pst5GG, final.
Johnson W MehRn, reference.
Hall Va Geyils, aaI5 confirmed.
KoHod ys Hartley references.
smith vs. HiCk5, report confirmed.
PoGesta vs. ArlE, appeal.
Greeulaw vs. MaydWel, reference, etc.
/ Jones VS. Curry, injunction dissolved etc.
J Walt VS. -ThOmsssU1, motion CyeFEuied,
Dickens vs. AppeIsOn, insufficient.
Gibson vs. Lewis, same.
CIRCUIT COURT-GeOrge ". Reeves.
JUdge-Ihe~ judgments Suffered il this
court yesterday, we're 50 followsg
Fletcher & Ksck W Douglas, Judgment
Coz plaintiff S4S9 81
johnson Fs II. Il . r. Il. Co., Judgment
fJr plaintiff SllO %.
| B oadugx Va Ctsnsbsw, adm'E, judgment
tOr,plsinuff $50 03.
McCOmbs VS. Wsr6eld, judgment FOR
plsiauh 1928 81.
Tne cases OF the ~cslsndsr, inserted BE-
low, vii be called for trial E0-dsy
43 stewart q Bro. vs. Chapman,
SO Simons ys Marks, Pump u Co.
50 Schcob vs. Wsdd g, admir-.
81 KsnAey vs. GOodlett.
% Snip d Co. vs. TJotter.
"a Moore, trustee, vs. Jones E BIC,
1 50 McMullin Ys McWlliams,
81 PIemptOn VS. COgsWeii.
/ 80 WeOO vs. SeymOre.
100 Mcdonald, gusrd., vs Jones et al
lOI 90 10 vs. Ward OF a.
lU2 do do vs. Ward It al.
lO3 Union Bank vs. Cham Os-s.
lbs Mitchell, executor, vs. NGits.
LOG Hswiey We ) Cckley,
lU7 Miller VS. Jones.
los Wilson vs. Pope.
lU9 Ulhmsn vs. StilmaR.
10 Ulnmsn vs. SIiluao.
III Kahn Va Siliman.
IL Wynn We CreDshaw.
IA3 Weaver vs. FoWlkes & Jones.
ia Neeley vs. Mckinney, executor.
lis CasB. admir-, vs. Bolton.
lI6 Mathews 4 Co vs. Aydlett & Co.
III Young vs. Msacham,
us LsWis vs. casters.
lI9 Powell VS. Sugsrman.
~ Cash, sdm'r, vs. Patterson.
l22 Sale vs. Newton.
lZS Berry We Bailey.
IA ) a5f, use, etc, ys Smith.
lZ5 HOck vs. Theibsid.
Law COUkT-H s. Lee Judge.-This
court was engaged all day yesterday ia
lrylug the case of Watson, trustee, vs. NJ.
4 II r r Co. This case not being con-
ciuded At tae time OF s~dj0urnmeaJ, will
be resumed this morning and disposed OF
ia e short time, after which the court
Will continue with Fridays calendar,
and II that should be disposed Of in time,
the case OF Johnson VS. Wicks 81 al, viii
be taken up for trial.
CRIMINAL COURT. - Vim. Hunter,
,JudQe.-The trial Of the case Of the State
" Gallagher, charged with the murder
[ Of Henry Cooper, which took place in
/ Nav. 1867, engaged the court the entire
dsy Yesterday. The case was given to
the Jury at 5 o'clock ia the evening. No
verdict had been returned up to the hour
Of reporting. To-day, Mo03sy's calen'
dar will be resumed and the cases there
on called peTmptOrily.