The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-03-12
MARINE couRT-aART |.
A Suit to Recover the Value OF Sto1el
Diamonds.
RafNre JudOe CrOau

n suit 10 ttocOvor the t0xUc OF stolen
Diamonds.
Before Judge Cross
Marie L. Carter vs.. James Clute.-The plaintiff, in
the latter part of December last, had stolen from
her pair OF diamond earrings purchased at Tif-
fany's for $500. Suspicion fell upon Mr.. weneke
who boarded in the same house with plaintiffs
mother, and while there distracted from plain
tiff's wardrobe the diamonds, and disposed of the
centre stone Of one OF them to the defendant, q
broker at 206 Broadway. for SIS, and the stones
from the other earring in store In Fulton street.
After spending the proceeds young Wencke became
penitent, confessed his sin, and went with the
plainrn to point out the places where he had sold
the diamonds. The defendants statement Is that
posed Of the stsne next day fer $lO6; that the
plaiAtin called on him, when he acknowledged
to her that he had purchased such stone AZ she
described, ana then agreed to obtain another tor
her Of the same quantity and size ter $75
Mr.. McNamara counsel Tor plaintiff argued that
defendant sought to defend himself did net apply
in this country, and that no purchaser, however
title to property. Considerable feeling was mani
tested by counsel on other side in the trial Of the
case and one Of the Jurors becoming indignant at
plaintiff called him to order and rebuked him for
his impertincAce. Verdict IN favor Of plaintiff for
amOunt claimed.
Action to Recover Commission on an
Alleged Contrast.
Francis O'Connsr VS.. Joshua b. Gates.-The de-
PENDANT in this action for about ten years occupied
the position OF general agent to the United States
Life Insurance Company for the State of New York
and part of New Jersey besides having the right to
solicit business as an ordinary agent over the same
territory. In both Of these capacities he received
commissions, in the former on all the policies Is
sued paying commissions within his Jurisdiction.
At the end Of each month accounts were made up
between the different agents and the company.
The plaintiff Is and has been the accountant OF the
same company, and claims that, about the end OF
October, 1869, the defendant, being in poor health
and somewhat dissatisfied with the way in which
his accounts were made up entered into an agree
ment with him to prepare his accounts at the
end OF each month, engaging to pay him for the
service five per cent OF the amount OF commissions
therein stated. Plaintiffs testimony Is that this
agreement was made with defendants son, Frank
lin and afterwards confirmed. The then President
OF the company was called, and testified to giving
plaintiff PERMISSION to act in this capacity out OF
office hours, but knew nothing as to the cOmpensa-
ton.
On the part of the defence was read the deposit
ton OF the defendant, who Is so Ill as to be COM
PEELED to live South during the Winter He utterly
denies any such agreement. claiming that the &C
counts made up by paintif were wholly in the per-
Torrance Of his duty toward the company Defend
ants sen, being dead, could throw no light on the
case.
The amount Of commissions embraced In the &C
counts on which paintf claims, running from
November, 1869, to January, 1871 IS $4,000 on
which the five per cent would be $1,000. Decision
reserved.