, 1870-11-17

fEJ0UN. NClEu Ia a
ons1neauonf. Heretofore rublfsned, WA INC cfa'
IL 5 r: ou. sons st:s.sa hoq54 .'4,vs MEN Il
ssmsses u ioiioTs: ii 500 per aose Tor ~ s;Is
zcfes less 4el-1.coo Of - acls y. los = sosn;
tsts1sss aToa1t ~n.,9 sSi saqs IA 70 Frsdeee
F.Maucy. for IS acres =: 8. .6oc re. sere. iess
a-i.ooo 81 u ss1s. q. sosds' With interest nak-
s9' :. .14s.ss = .a.e causes pending .aa
hence he Guratsnoe of he tnes!aetlon. osoomsa
important The couFr u sted It to b law tnRt tue
otne1s Of re mnas y 9aesaSa Whs, *. i.nd
rcaiIy worth on The dsy On which the South PARK
act went iulo operation, no mat'er WHIT caases
contributed 70 eve Il IT, value u tnat spec!aed
should consaes the opinion Of tho Witnesses welt
as the evidence respecting actoI 6ales Of land
made about that time Ia ihe viciciry, aided nJ The
personal Inspection OF the land which had been
nno,dei 10 the Jury. II the lands within the
PARK linitR were not. IN tact, enhanced In value
BY the passaxe Of She Park aet, Then the awAsd
fact that lard outside the boundaries VAS special
~ benefited By the 1ccaiion Of TIC pasf a!taoa&n A
any benefit generally to snds n ana 4 snttct
ry. Topd attach to this a. we'll ~ 70 otaer Aoo,
60 that It should be taken into acc1nnt "a esama
psfS % and Doulesar,s solely TO land. N.n9
outside Of ,he p,tk 95 naS Tsason not ef ~, fas
SeP2a tss Faiae ot ibis parucnlar piece which was
tnfcn hy The act Therefore, IN estt!nAan{ tne
value of his lsna q tae * daie r nxsd: me j1f5
fhe 1uaISft value Of outlying Lands. adjacent to
he properly IN controversy. II that r1se WAS
sseteq g tns fset Il htr Sens oasde o. nd sdja
cent tc, the park OF necessity such Appreci1-
t,en must have been confined 70 the land outside
iRpaied a. BENZ within. and its ralue snou!d not
Be enhanced because otter land was, specially,
Increased In ya,ue. 30 the rule Of law t1At the
ralue OF land was to be determined In causes aim.
x. es.r.essr Z md qasig ''eead' . unass as
ets eospssi!ion among pa1eh,sess nass s1ss s
furnishing fair ct1tt fion Of rnlne shoud be zale.
OF properly, not only OF like character and ausl
/ ity, hut the tarcnm:tarces md situation Of tho
property sod should also be considered. II there
| were special circumstances affecting the value o.
the property gold {eitner to enhance o- eprectass
its vaine, the pace at which aale was made. u
value oi lind Dot thus specially ane ted.
Of ita own motion. "A io,loMs: The plaintiff l. en-
to iaads IN the vicinity of ths park IL there ~
any such nprlicatton>. which n1ected th'
prcperty OF the plaintiff In coumo,
~ osnfn ees @
| caused By the anuclpRuon Of PARK, OF ~ an
other way, but, II the liking OF tns PARK Tins
~sh g ed net H. a
l OF NE platnI1, then the pl1InuH II not enutlet
| to any such Epec1N vafoe 20 given to other 1anda
| And while the fact Of the passage Of the PARK &c
4 ny tho LEEi6lAtu1e should not be allowed In n
estimation Of the Jury to dep:ecaata the lands Q
or any Other reason the p1AIoun = lands were No
tnc1cared In ralre for several Doutha PRIOR t
March =, 1853, then you ought not 70 give to II
plaintiff i land any special value which mtRt
| nave attached duriuR thoee months To Lands di
| ft1cuty situated, II any aid Eo attach, hT reeSo
u their relation to park lines, ard which did NJ
attach to plslnun y land.
| ALLEGED NA1lC1ouS PROSECUTION
George A. tshufe1dt, Jr, y 5ames q. william
sQp, TLl4 was AZ action on the case to recoyi
for IN alleged malicious and tmpr0per proeec
| lion. Five thousand doIlA's wese claimed II dan
| aEee and, up0u the institution OF TIT zuls,
| eatids qd. rts. WaS sued ouf. The ehArEeH. tn
. | OF the 1lth d&y OF JauuarJ. A. .. 1867. delenda
, (1NIr:lBmson) fucd nut eaPias IN the Cniu
reeletl IN the charge that he had obtained VI
worth OF United States bonds on Ialae pIetent'
This cause went to the jury.
IL pEARLoTKs CONF 10 GRtEF.
s john HcrltuEt.n =. TIE Otarlore Fanny, G.
1 slEttEE OF Iwo males and two tema1es- ThIs '
an actiun 10 recover for io.ctole erietton Of pla
III ard his family from farm lauds In Nottane
The defendants st np The te!minatlon o. . ies
under which pllntin held. To the contrary
| ,hif, rlalutin answered that there n1d hce1
verbal extension, TO which It WAS replied that
| yerhaI c-nIrect was insufficient to mate void
+ | one which r-as written. The Jury found 40
the Instructions OF the Court, George aud Rtch
E Dea1loye guilty Of the Hesrsss. assessing
!, Of fnc Ccuft we're OF the ordinary character.
F.l srns-snr f.nnrt