Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1871-11-05
LAW REPORT.

First Cfreuif C0urt-HelskeIl, Judge
The gentlemen summond to attend in
this court tomorrow, and serve as regular
jurors, are notified to so manage thsil
business matters as to be able to serve fol
one month, the time which they will be
detained, as the court will accept of no ex-
cuses on that sccount. On yesterday the
name of ]. NJ, Greer, Esq was enrolled
as q member of the bar. The calendar for
Monday contains the following cases: 852,
Millesrd VS. NJ & A of Memphis; 302, Ed
dins VS. Vensble; AL, Witt VS. Rosenstein
ct al; 439, Page VS. Dickens; 634, Lowen-
stein vs. Ksufman; 667, Brinkiey VS. Pc
ters ct all 594, Cioslla VS. Talmsdge; $50,
Renfro VS. Crowleyj So, Desoto bank vE
Citizens union bank; 645, Wolcott IS Coo
ley; SAG, Euphrates lodge vs. Peres; 6i7,
McGavock VS. Lsrkin; $50, Notion vs. Lo-
ry; Col, White vs. MuIery; 652, Schlsppaek
VS. Heinrich. 654, Gslena ct al VS. LosgUe
655, NJ q A vs. Gsrin; COZ, NJ
& A VS. Mentges; 663, N & A VS.
Fitzpatrick; 664, Calhoun vs. Loeb ct al;
665. King vs. Merrimsn; 66s, Gibson VS.
Elliott; 67l, Benges VS. Wildberger lad
ministrstorl: 67S, Spear vs. Morrow; GA,
Taylor VS. Eshman; SIC, Murry VS. Hartley
ct Al; $50, Mayor and Aldermen OF Mem
phis w Heinstedt; 69l, Mayor and Alder
men OF Memphis vs. Heinstedt; 702. Mayor
and Aldermen Of Memphis VS. Newell;
707, Bird ct Al vs. AeClc1d; no, Pyne vs.
Cockrell; TI2, Martin VS. Hill; ia,
Douglass vs GTeenlsw; 7l5, Bowman VS.
Cockrell; ~, Brinkley Va McGibbon, ,
72S, Taylor vs. Hesse; 729. Algeo vs. Tate
ct al $50, Etns Life Insurance Company
rs Stebbins ct al; 7SS, Crump ct al VS.
Moody ct al; fS5, Foote Ys Ccslls; 7S5,
Hsrdemsn VS. Heinrich; 73s, Frierson VS.
ApPerson, executor; IA, Mayor and Al
daRrnen Of Memphis VS. Staid; T5l, Mayor
snd Aldermen Of Memphis VS. Re1er;
76O, Mayor and Aldermen of Memphis VS.
Staid; 76S, Mayor and Aldermen of Mem
phis VS. Cunningham; T64, Mayor and AL
dermen OF Memphis Va Fuller; 100, Lsw-
less vs. James; g7S, Stevenson VS. Nc
Knight 77e, Jenny vs. Hesse, Levy & Co.
Second Chancery Court = Chancellor
BcOtt.
The following cases are set for Monday
November 6, 1871: 50, Whitthorne VS.
Hsrdemsn; So, Owen vs Irvine; ll9, Shep-
srd VS. Shsperd; l52, Fowler va Wigs; 159,
School6eld VS. Allen; l63, Rsnkirt VS. GAL
lowsy; 100, Wells vs. Carson; 2S2, Tobin vs.
Malone; 2s5, Picksrd VS. Morse; sI5, Hal
lum VS. Massey; Sl6, williams VS. Brown;
Sl9, Geruty vs. Geruty; S2l, Battle VS. Will
kerson; S2S, Doyle vs. MeGbbon; 324, Jones
VS. Walker; S25, NJ N B VS. johnson; S47,
Memphis Life insurance company VS. Left-
wich.
First ChAneery COurt-Aorgan,. Chan
celIor.
Cases set for hearing, Monday, Novsm-
Der 9th, 1871: AS, Meath vs. Smith; 491, Wills
VS.. whitmore; sos, Lincoln VS. Davis; SAT,
White vs Delswney; 6ss, Devins VS. Toof;
9l4, Lofsnd vs. Coward; 10SS, May VS.
Lewis; 1901, Walt VS. Thomssson; 1142,
Msrriman ys Cannovsn; 1l46, Wilbourne
VS. Gone; 1l47, McAdams vs. Lsski; 1l50,
Myers vs. Losgue: 1I51, Stone VS. Hart /;
ub2, Dunlap Va Welsh; II5S, Gumhinger
VI Jsmson; 1l55, Jsffray vs. Holland; 1l56,
Bush va Thurber; 1157, Jones VS. Sullivan I;
ii6s, Goodwin vs. Goodwyn; 1859, Lecocq
W Lecoeq; 1160, Berlin VS. Wright; lI63
Plummer vs Losgue; 1164, Rolf vs. Robert
son; ue6s Bailey vs. Hicks; 1l67, Wasson VS.
Schless; 1l68, Stillman vs Stillmsn; 1859,
Kinsland We League; 1I7O, Meath VS.
Kortrecht; iii, Hollenshsde VS. Gibson
1I72. 6tadler vs. Weld; I17S. Lowsnstein
vs Ashe; llT4, Watson VS. Erskine; ll75,
Tsrley ys Galloway; 1l77, Hoffman vs.
Wyatt.
English papers, lately received, discuss
the new social movement In that country.
growing out Of the alleged alliance be-
tween the vorkingmen and certain OF the
peers and members of parliament, and
the Times Is now disposed to believe that
Lord Derby and Dlsrseh have pledged
themselves to the programme OF the work.
ingmen, as beratofore indicated. The
Daily News looks upon the movement as
Incredible. Sir Stsfiord Northcote, one
OF the alleged signators to the so-cslled
"tresty" betwsen the peers and working
men. publishes letter denying that anv
OF the noblemen or gentIemsn whose
names have been brought under public
notice, signed or In anyway intimated their
agreement with the revolutionists, and
alt hat he thinks that was done was an
expression of the Willingness of some OF
the peers and members OF parliament 10
consider the well-being OF the working
classes. The movement was denounced
at meeting Of the London Democrats on
the 18th Of October. r - -
The store Of Mr.. L. Lssker, Little Rock