The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-02-27

Judgments

Supreme Court IN BancChief Justice Tho ppso, and
Judges Agnec, Shdrs,cood and Williams.
me Following Judgments were delivered this
In the matter of the application of the President
The judges OF these districts being Incorporated by
sickness, having asked the judges OF this court to
hold Court OF Oyer and Terminer In their Districts
and these applications having occurred often OF
late 1t was deemed proper to inquire into the law OF
the the matter being an open question The pseya,
Of judge confined his jurisdiction to the district
therein sPecin;ed and that ne was without authority
sequence OF which theory was that when the justices
Of district % Were by any circumstance
to sit for them instead Of applying to the jndge Of
the the nearest district The unanimous opinion OF
this bench Is that the opinion above mentioned is
allacous, and that tie Judges OF the adjoining dis
trict is fully competent to hold courts when called
upon by another Judge who is disabled by any una
voidabie necessity. The application was therefore
refused: Opinion by Agnew.J
Daniel f. Moore ct al VS.. The Green and Coates
Streets Passenger Railway Company. Appeal from
the decree OF the Common Pleas of Philadelphia
county. Decree an1rmed. Appellant 10 pay costs OF
Maran vs. Drexel Certificate from NIsi Prus.
Decree of Nisi Prius modified, receiver appointed,
and sale ordered to be made in accordance with the
terms OF the modified decree. Agnew, j.
John Wendt vs. Craig Blanchard. Error to the
affirmed. Agnew ].
James Tobin vs.; g. John Trumpand: Error to the
District Court OF Philadelphia Judgment affirmed.
Appeal Of Agnes Elwyn, committee of F. G. Dali
mon Pleas OF Philadelphia. Decree affirmed. Ag-
Delaware and Chesapeake Steamboat Company vs..
STAIRS. Error to District Court Of Philadelphia.
Judgment affirmed. Sharswood, J..
Pratt vs.. Ely. Error to Court OF Common Pleas or
Philadelphia Judgment reversed and Judgment
given for defendant on case stated Sharswood, j.
Conrad ct al. vs. Commercial Mutual Insurance
Company. Error to District Court OF Philadelphia.
Judgment reversed aud record remitted with orders
Martin ct al. VS. Brien. Error to District Court of
Philadelphia Judgment affirmed. Williams j.
last week of the Philadelphia list aud therefore rel
quested counsel to accelerate their business as muc
as possible.
Revenue Gases.
United States District Coltrt-yttdge CadioalGder.
The United States VS.. John Collins and Samuel
Pennington. An action on distiller's leasehold
lery, to secure against fraud in the conduct OF the
business. On trial.
The Myers Homicide.
| Court Of Oyer and TerDltzer-.JIdgeS LadlOw ana
The case before the Court to-day is that OF
Adolpne Fisher who was SIN indicted for mansia1ghMteT ter
lady In her ninetieth year. The facts OF the case
are that on the evening OF Friday September O. last,
about O'Clock, Mrs. Myers started from her grand
daughters house. Mascher and Jefferson streets,
| TO 60 TO her own home, the first door in Thompson
at Hope: and Thompson the defendant drove up
in a heavy nvespring wagon and ran
Syee several S ls auss Ser Sean ne of tRe
broken ribs penetrated her lungs, and she died
| Mnlo pnyslCldn WAS sewing up Tue WOunu on neE
head In drug store He was as once arrested and
he ana the deceased were taken TO the house whence
she had started from, and It was testified that he
appeared TO be under the influence of liquor. His
wife entered the room and asked what was the
matter, and he replied that old lady was tottering
| across the street, and old women had no business
to be out after night. There were two drug gstores
and tailor shop at the Intersection OF these streets,
| and all had bulk-windows, In which the gas was
| burning. The deceased was q strong, active
| Womane for one OF her years, had good sight, and
| her mental faculties were unimPared.
The prosecution is OF course, based upon the i'm
mutation of negligence, without proof OF which the
| accused OF course is not amenabe to the criminal
| law ON trial @. NJ. Murphy and James II. Heye-
rim Esqs appear for the defendant