The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1871-05-20

YORK, ss-MAY TERM, A. D. 1S71-DIcKER J.
PREsIDING-Ar ALFRED,
The following is the list of indictments presente5
by the grand jury, who were discharged Thursday
morning after session OF only two days-the short
est for years. Not only We're eighteen indictments
found, but in the that occupied more attention
than all the others the grand jury ignored the bill
Those returned are:
State VS.. John F. johnson, two for burglary and
one tor compound larceny.
State VS.. John f. Foss, breaking and entering
and escape.
State VS. David P. Matthews, cheating. @
State VS.. Joseph Bel, escape
State VS.. John G. Lewis, Iippling shop and COM
mon seller. = -
State VS.. Amos W. Low, assault and battery.
sta,e VS.. farsonsheld, Limerick, Wells and Day
State VS.. Edward Kicker, appellant. -
State vs.. Cornelius Finn, peace
State vs.. Samuel I'll ompson fraudulent co, version
OF funds eff bank.
THURsDAY.-State VS.. John f. johnson. Burg
larry and larceny in North Berwick and breaking and
horse stealing from the stable of his late employer
three indictments. to all OF which he pleaded guilty.
He smiled hunorously and sarcasticalIy at the YER
bose, antiquated and illogical style and minute
particularly with which the County Attorney had
stated his Offences but smiled out of the other side
OF bis mouth when the clerk read to him in direct.
concise and orcibe English the sentence of the pre-
siding justice, booming him to and three
years in State Prison, nine years in all.
State VS.. John f. Foss. Breaking, and entering
and larceny in the day time, in Wells. Plea guilty.
Sentence, three years at Thomaston.
Louisa j. Woman vs.. Horace Woodmap Libel
for divorce. Parties live in Saco; have. before ap-
piled for divorce and flied cross bels former cases
withdrawn; former offences condoned, and parties
lived together again till within a few months when
the odd trouhIaa hraa a,Yt
two sons by former wife, young men grown, and two
little daughters by this wife. The defendant is own
er OF valuable patent in machinery FIR cotton mills
which brings In an income some years 1t is said of
$4,000 Cross libels have been again returned this
term, the wife at first applying for divorce meso ct
horo but by consent amending her libel and asking
for divorce rincuto. Court order follows Libel
liant to have the care and custody of the minor chill
dren as prayed and the sole and control of the
house in which she now lives, together with the
household furniture OF every description pending the
libel Libeee to deposit with the Clerk $500 tor the
support OF the libeLant and her children, pending
the libel and also $500 to enable her to prosecute
her libel; sums to be paid in thirty days.
Hubbard with Edwin B. Smith.
Eastman with B. Bradbury.
George II. Munroe VS.. james knights, appellant.
Account annexed for painting defendants house.
PalntDg was done by lnman and Scott. Plaintih
claims that they were his men; that the painting
was his job Defendant says not your job but mine
true, Scott was your man and tor him offer to be
defaued for $40. Inman, both parties concede, was
not reliable; had habit OF borrowing things with
cut leave, and in this case received pay from both
parties. Verdict for plaintiff for 1885,
Mckinney. Smith and Hamilton.
Joseph G. Harmon VS.. Martha j. Moore, adm'x eff
Joseph Moore. Action on sherfs receipt for horsa s
and carriage, S16O. Defence team used to carry
mail not liable to attachment. Receipt given under
duress to relieve team that plaintiff could fulfill
his contract with Uncle Sam. Not heard here but
sent up on report.