Delaware tribune. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1867-1877, 1870-05-19

Nublhiucu tub INV iDTteltluR tub pToptrtys hu
appeal was taken and the case will be carried up
10 the Circuit Court.
MAY TERM-NEw CASTLE COUNTY COURTS.
SATURDAY.
Tho Court this morning, took up the Argument
List, and few cases were disposal of.
Rebccca Cummins VS.. Alexander Cummins.-
Petition for divorce. Rev. Mr.. Wynkoop proved
he solemnization Of the marriage as officiating
clergyman. Divorce granted mensd et Moro.
Qrom bed and bnard) with the custody of the
minor children. Lore for the petitioner Maris
for respondent.
Kirchnrr & Co. VS.. Tailev & Miller.-A capias
ad respondendDm was Issued against the firm, de-
PENDANTS, and returned non est as to Taov.
MILLER was taken. and gave ball to the Sheriff
Mr. Harrington, for Miller, petitioned the Court
for rulf nisi, to vacnte the bond on The ground
Of the infancy of this defendant. Motion refused
and order for special bill to he entered before
the end of tho session. McCaulley for plaintiffs
Tho Lancaster Manufacturing Company vs.. the
same. -Issue Of summons returned non eat as
| to Talley. Mr.. Harrington peiitioned the Court
for the appointment of guardian dd Item fer
Miller as an infant under the age Of 81. Granted
Barr for plaintiff.
Allison & Fav va. Byrne & Reiey.-Rule to
chow case why Judgment against Byrne should
not be vacated on the ground that 1t was obtained
without the knowledge or consent of the petl.
tiouer. This was judgment on warrant OF
Attorney Ia the joint name of the firm defendants
Rule made absolute. Patterson for Byrne; Cor
don for plaintiff.
Walton q Whann vs. David mili-Argu-
ment on demurrer. by Ignatius Y. Grubb for
plaintiff; john H. Rodney for defendant.
Ruth vs.. Steel.-Case stated. Judgment for
plaintiff entered by consent, without argument,
amount to be ascertalned by the prothonotary.
Bayard for plaintiff Gordon for defendant.
Court adjourned until Monday.
MONDAY.
Quigley, Us. Searns, The defendant, out on
bail. was summoned by his bnndsman, Passmore
Mitchell. Judgment for &3698 was entered for
the plaintiff by consent, with nine months stay
of execution, and the defendant was released.
Lore for the plaintiff Gordon for the defendant.
Samuel NJ. Bowman, vs. Daniel Lammot, Jr.
Action on promissory note for 1868 81. given by
defendant to plaintiff, with interest from Febru-
| ary. 1865.
1864, the plaintiff, defendant, and DR.. Henry
Garrett, al The instance Of Florencio Morgnando,
| q brother in.law OF tho defendant, representing
| the firm of Bryan, Philpot, Sherman Il Co., of
Baltimore, entered into an oil speculation, the
plaintiff investing s1666 81, md loaning to Gar
rett, and defendant, each like amount, taking
their promissory notes. The speculation, subse
quenlly, iailed when Garrett paid the plaintiff
MS note, and subsequently, settled with Bryan
date, had failed 10 discharge his Indebtedness TO
the plaintiff, but had by letter, admitted the
debt, and renewed the promise.
The defence was, that by settlement which the
piulhtIu uuu Will ouci ulhh " W. no uuu icili-
bursed himself tor the amount of the defendants
| note, aud that upon this payment they conse-
quenlly relied. They failed, however, TO prove
satisfactorily to the jury, that the settlement OF
| Bowman was Tor more than his individual share
If the loss, and verdict was rendered for the
plaintiff tor the sum claimed. Judge Wootten
| presided, and charged the jury. Lore for the
| plaintiff; Harrington for the defendant.
| the case for bodily Injury.
The testimony on tho part of the plaintiff
proved that he was, and stlll Is In the employ OF
Jackson * Sharp, cur builders OF this city. That
on the l6tu Of January 1869, while at work, 10
dismaulling car on siding, 10 front OF the
work shops, he was damned between that car
and another, upon the same track, by the sudden
| approach of shifting engine. and severely
crushed. Damages laid ~ S10,O0O.
Drs. Kirchner and Jones, the plaintiffs medical
attendants, were called to prove the severity and
extent of the Injuries, the time of illness and dis
ability, the RI snlting effect upon the system, and
the present debilitaled condition. DR.. Kirchner
testified that he was the first physician in ntten-
dance, and deemiDg his patient in perllous con-
dition, subsequently, consulted with DIR. Jones'
he was visited by them for three or four weeks
and then removed to bis home ON the Brandywine
B inks. He has at present chronic affection OF
the kidneys, resulting from the accident.
George Stearns. testified that as Superintendent
of construction 10 the employ Of the Railroad Co.,
| IN 1868, he laid Down the main side track on
which the plaintiff was Injured, for the jort &c
COMMUNICATION of the Railroad Co., and jackson
| & Sharp. The work was paid for by Jackson ~
John E. Thoroughbred testified that he was at
work In Detached car near the two, between
which the plaintiff was working when Injured.
| The accident was caused by the sudden violent
backing or pushing Of a shifting locomotive on
the track, Without warning of any kind by blow.
ing whistle or ringing bell or other notice.
Witness first experienced a heavy shock Ia the
car wherv be Was, aud which the conclusion
damaged. Hearing cry of distress he ran out
and saw the plaintiff jammed between the cars,
and supposed by the position he was fatally in.
jured The plaintiff was taking the bumper"
from the car which was an old one,eold or given
by the Railroad Company 10 jackson Il Sharp.
Witness explained to the jury, from plot, the
position OF the tracks, aud from sketch made
by counsel the position of the cars and plaintiii
at The time. Witness further testified that he had
never known the main side track used by the
Railroad Company above Seventh street, except
Tor the purpose uf taking away cars manuiac-
iured by Jackson q Sharp. Plaintiff still suffers
IRON injury, and Is unable to perform heavy
work as before. Cars were frequently upon ,hi,
track tor purposes OF repair.
William tarudey testified that, under orders Of
the foreman, he directed the ploirtiff to perform
the work In which he was engaged when injured
Never knew OF any objection by the Railroad
Company to the use OF the track by jackson &
Sharp. Plaintiff returned 10 work In about fou
months after the accident. In shifting cars tina
day the Railroad Company were acting In a care
less manner, and witness had consequently
,utioned the workmep.
William Hanley testified that he was al work q
The same car with the plaintiff when the lattc
was injured aud himself narrowly escaped. M
warniug or notice Of the approach of the locomo
tive was given. Plaintiff is not robust befOr
the injury.
Elias NJ Chandler testified that the plaintiff
boarded with him At the time of the accident, an,
he thought him fatally II jured he was certalnl,
severely injured
Jei, miah Mahoney In the employ of the Rail
road Company, in 1863, as Roadmasterput dow
he curved siding near which the plaintiff wa
iujured,a and which terminates in the shop O
Jackson Il Sharp.
Edward johnson, lie shiler for tue Railroa
0 Company. Has had notice not to 20 on TIL
track hey Ond seventh street. without orders.
j Case rested for the paintiif.
Il The defence was that the plaintiff was on thi
track as trespasser, and further, that by his ow
negligence he contributed to the accident eltbe
fact il was claimed sbsolvtd the Company froI
blame or responsibility.
Job ii. dickson. oil the firm of jackson
. Sharp called. Sworn on the rOir dire, and oil
J. lection by Mr.. Bayard for plaintiff on the groun
1T interest in the event OF the suit. Interest di
!. claimed by witness Sworn In chief Tesihe
!, that the Railroad Company own the straight cid
II track to certain limit described by Witness IN
o that jackson x sharp own the curve which tie
% | inmates In their works. Curve was censtructt
ID by Railroad Company. and paid for by the wi
ness.
lie On cross examination, the witness admlttt
(; that he felt himself under an obligation to rein
Or burse the Railroad Company, for the damag
and expenses in this suit, should The plant
lie recover. He had been informed by the Compal
I'd that they should hold him liable for SUCH or u
2. track leading to his works would be moved
At six O'clock the Court adjourned until Tue
he day morning.
- TUESDAY.
William H. Patterson, rs. Philadelphia, W
D, mington & Baltimore Railroad Co., resume
u Evidence tor the defence.
", David Baird WAS called, and testified that
~ was shifter in the employ Of the Railroad Col
pany and that upon the day the plaintiff W
Injured he went, with the engine, to take aw
from Yuckson d Sharp's, three new cars III
had finished, to be sent to Philadelphia. Motto
that the car at which the plaintiff was at woI
was stripped of the 4" bumper" and ran
'as thought he would have trouble In removing it.,
IT connection with other cars plaintif was not
he tween the cars when witness passed Into Jacks
he a. Sharps office, when he returned he heard
he cry of distress from The plaintiff the bral
rus were off Of this when This is the case, G.
nd 10 coupling will move The distance between
al cas- on which Patterson was working and the
nut which struck him was four TO six feet The C
SEQ were not checked
DDS Gross examination. were two cars