Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1869-06-03
LAW

SHELHE CIRCUIT COUET-E. ~. RcereS,
JHdge-Ihis Court was mostly occupied
yesterday i'm diSpOsinE of the small cases
ON the Criminal Docket. There are but
very few important eases IN the docket
this term. The majority of these viii be
brought up and determined I'M few days.
No business OF public interest was trans
acted on the civil sid yesterday.
The Jury in the ease Of The State VS. Sam
TORY, tcol0redl elsrgedFSi stealing two
bales of cotton, returned q verdict of
guilty, li&iug the punishment at seven
wears imprisonment in the PeniteHtiary.
The several Earnishce'S summoned in
the caso ofthe state rs Philip Garvin. are
notified to appear and answer onSaturd3V
next, the 5Jh INST, al 9 O'Clock am. \
prompt attendance is cNacted, 50 as TO
avoid amy interruption of the mandamus
case OF Nilliain Wallace vsJ. T.. Williams.
Commissioned OF Registration, which will
be taken mp precisely nj 10 o'clock on
that day.
To-day is the first regular motto N day of
the term. Al motions properly before
the Court Will be heard and determined.
NUSICIPAL CoBBT-Geo. ". Wdk& b,
J3sdGe.-Yesferday's calendsrws entirely
disposed Of in this Court. Judgments
We're rendered in nearly all Of the cases.
Some few went over to the next term.
The calendar for to-day is Us follows:
l222 Sanford, EN'r, VS. Merriman.
1907 Vance Us Van Broekliu.
1852 Martin vi Hin.
1862 KimhJIl Bros. VS. Slidcll.
1877 MUniord Us GayQa0 MauuEict'g Go.
1872 Hart - Miles.
1879 Same VS. Same.
1879 Houston VS. Chambers.
1870 Kirkland " Widrig.
1876 Atkinson, Elk, VS. CrattOrd, Adm'N.
1877 LarAcin VS. Mary Malone, Ex'N.
1879 Gaibreath. Stewart & Co. vs. Duff.
1880 Hunt, Admir-, vs. Mary,Harris. Ad'X.
1881 HeathsE Go. vs. Fletcher, ct M.
1882 Citizens ms. Co. Us Babb, ct al.
1888 Mcfarland VS. Mary Malone, Ex'X.
1884 Heiskell, Scott & Heisllel vs. Dayie.
1888 Moore, Eader q Co. vs. Jones.
1886 Semmes d Co. vs. Gatti.
1888 Coggswen vs. sherry, ct al.
1889 Goodwin Us VIM.
1900 McEenroIe IS Thomas.
1892 Harris VS. Knapp.
1893 Borton-vs Busy and wife.
1891 Washington VS. Robertson.
1895 Mayor and Aldermen of Memphis vs.
Wright.
1896 Same vs. Wiseman.
1897 Same vs. Savers.
1898 Walker vs. Estes.
1899 Citizens Onion Bank VS Redwime.
1000 Pollard VS. Alexander.
200l Boiling vs. Guest.
2002 Hazar & Son vs. Galloway &Go.
zoos Berlin VS. Kendig ct al
2004 Hart VS. H~ollenshade & On.
zoos BeIlnap& Co vs. same.
zoos Brinsley VS. Megibben.
2007 Mo0nYs Holmes, admir-.
zoos Sullivan VS. Cicalia, jr.
amara vs. sTae,
20l0 Orrill Bros Co rs Armstrong.
law CoUBT-H s. Zee, Jadoe-This
Cont VIII c0nvenec to-day at 10 o'clock. |
Decisions VIII then he delivered in all
cases now held under abatement by the
Court, Bill of exceptions win he exam
ined and signed also.
Z. S. CIRCUIT M DISTRICT COURTS
Justices n. II. iSWaYlle and c. 4, I5{qg pre-
sidltg.-The business entertained in the
above Courts yesterday was of an unim-
character.
The jury in the case of Whalen VS..
.reenlaw.sabmjtted tuesday, brought
IN a verdict for the plaintiff.
Case No. l57, Stephens vs.. AiGtor No. >,
IS set for 9th juno.
No business on the calendar Tor today.
< CkRD Ep5R NRfrTs.-IIaging devoted
4 lene1ife todthe Instruction ofvouth, and
being now about to resign its more active
L take occasion 10 return my most
hearty acknowledgements for tine long con-
.inued and generous support / have here
Thanks are usually returned
the hope Of more extended faVors.
L is not withthis expectation that | do
%; for an ~profoundlg grateful that my
inOcess has always been as marked as my
devotion has been upfalllng, no longer
eek general patronage. fwfiihereaffef
each 2 select elassle toys, ifenh fifteen to
,ighteen In number, betWeen The ages of
light and fourteen. TINS class viii be re-
for q Term Of not less than Two
Years. desire ~suclronly a4eg9l and lciH
De educated, and whose home training
gives assurance that my labors viii not be
n vain. NV object is to educate well, and
lot to waste the remaIld der Of my life ON
hose to whom ~nature@alld Surrounding
circumstances alike deny 9 highdegree of
.ntelleftual cHltiyptionsa Dtfring mTfab-
from the city until September 10Th
application for a plges " this flass may
Vance & Anderson, Attorneys AT Law or
OF w. smith, Esq, Peoples Bank:
IA bl a \. l.. NIGUS. =,