Wilmington daily commercial., 1873-05-22
FIRST EDITION.
COURT PROCEEDINGS.

NEW CASTLE May 81, 1873
Tue Courts were opened, this morning. at the
usual hour.
Toomey was discharged from fnfther custody.
He was held in default of bail for the desertion
of his wife and child.l
The Court also discharged from further Gus
tody, John Griffin, col, who has been confined
to Jail in default OF bail since Nov. 18th, 70, on
the charge of bastardy, on the motion of W. r.
Hodgson, Esq, as counsel for the Trustees of
the Poor Of New CASTLE County.
During the day tho Sheriff received letter
from his excellency, the Governor of the State,
remtting 30 much of the sentence Of the law,
in the Gaze OF the State Us. Mary A Meteer, the
colored woman convicted OF murder in the Sec
ond degree, at the Last session of the Court, Of
Oyer and Termner relates to the "whipping
and piliory," until June 14h next, until he could
look into the matter, and prepare the papers.
Also remitting the whipping in the case of
State Us John Downing, convicted Of larceny at
this term, until the same day, Oath June }
There does not seem to be much doubt in
the minds of those best acquainted with the
former case, but that this action of Governor
Ponder is tantamount to a final omission of this
The case of Mrs. E.. 0Daniel us. The Bakers
Union, which has been on trial for several days,
was again resumed, tho defence continuing the
examination OF their witnesses, closing their
evidence at about III A. NJ, when the Plain
ply, closing at 1919.
There have been in this case some 80 witnesses
examined on both sides, aud frequently some of
hem has bean called more than once, thus con-
suming great length OF time. Mr.. Patterson,
the counsel for the plaintiff, begun his opening
argument to the Jury at the above hour and
concluded at about o'clock. during which he
cited many authorities, both English and Amer
ican, as 20 the question of damages, and the
rule OF assessing it's different kinds.
MIR. Bird replied in an elaborate argument, and
one of great length, reviewing the authorities of
Mr.. Patterson, aud citing many of his own, 10
support OF the defendent'e side of the question.
He dwelt at considerable length on the point,
brought out by the evidence, and on which he
relied-that, as the case of Mrs. ODaniel's foun-
dation wall was proven on the ground OF the de-
fendant some IL inches and had been there for
upward Of 20 years-that she was the trespaseer,
aud such possession was not an adverse one
would give her q title byprescriptiOn from the
fact, that the rule of law that title by pre-
scription could only be given by holding ad-
versely-as of right-and with knowledge or no
notice to the defendant of such her possession,
which, in this case, could not, or had not been
shown, as the holding had been at the foot of the
wall completely hid from the eyes of this de-
fendant, or any one else, except the very persons
who had built her wall-and that such holding
could not, from the facts proven in the case, be
an adverse one as OF right in any sense OF the
word that it follows she was tresspasser to the
amount of ground her wall covered, and that
they had the right 80 to treat her and did do
80, when they built on the part of her walls
thus on them that il she had title to this
much of their ground, thus obtained, she, by the
same rule, could acquire right to or feet,or
in fact the while OF it, while, in fact, no one
would be owner of it until the time al
lowed by law (20 years. had elapsed, and
she came forward and enforced her
claim by an ejectment. He read many
decisions OF the Courts to sustain him on this
po mt, as we'll as to his point that Mrs. o'Daniel
mad notice OF the fact that the Bakers Union
were digging on the extremity of their lot, and
adjoining her, and that she had made no objec-
ton in any manner.
At about quarter to six p NJ, Mr.. Bird began
to address the jury and continued until the hour
of adjournment arrived, leaving his argument
unfinished
At six p NJ, the Court adjourned until ten
o'clock. tomorrow,