The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-04-14
THE LITTLE WAF, MARY ELLEN, AGAIN.
History Of Her Indenture-Arrest
of Mrs. Connolly.
THE ToMPKINs SQUARE RIOT.
Simple Verdict of Assault Against
Christian Mayer.
BUSINESS IN THE OTHER COURTS

In the United States Circuit Court yesterday the
case OF Anthony Oechs The Collector OF the Port
came on for hearing before Judge Woodrun and
Jury The act OF 1854 provides that wine, in cases.
shall pay certain duty, according TO the value OF
che wine. IL also provides that each bottle shall
pay a duty OF three cents. In estimating the du-
table value OF the wine the appraisers and Col
lectOr add all charges to make up the dutiaDie
value, including the charge for the bottle, The
plaintiff, Anthony Oechs, imported quantity OF
wine into tins city, on which duty was levied. In
GLIDING the cost OF the bottle. He claims that
since the bottle pays specific duty Its
cost ought not to be included in the dutia
BILE value OF the wine. The Collector sets
mp that he has no authority, by law or otherwise,
to omit any or the charges actually incurred. The
suit is brought by Mr.. Oechs against the govern
ment to recover the amount OF money which he
alleges he has paid on the Importation in question
by way OF excess The amount is small, but there
are several cases Of similar character depending
upon the result OF this one. Mr. Il. II. Tremaine
for the government; Mr.. Edward Hartley for the
plaintiff. Alter the case had been heard to con-
siderable extent, it appeared that the plaintiff had
no witnesses in attendance who could swear that
the bottles were included in the estimate made by
the appraisers, and counsel for plaintiff asked to
have juror Withdrawn and let the case stand over
till the May term, when he would be In position
application condition or plaintiff paying the
costs.
In the United states Circuit Court, yesterday, be-
fore Judge Woodruff and jury, the case OF Wyllls
Blackstone, Receiver, &C., VS.. The Home Insurance
Company OF Columbus, Ohio, brought on for
trial Ii was an action to recover a sum Of money
on q certain policy OF insurance. Alter some Tor.
mai proof had been given, by consent OF counsel
for defendant and by direction or the Court the
'$4,70S 80. stay OF thirty days was granted to
enable the defendant to file bill OF exceptions on
some points OF law which have been raised in the
Case.
In the United States Circuit Court yesterday,
Jury was empanelled, before Judge Woodruff, to
try the case OF E..S. Jafray Co. vs. ex-Collector
Thomas Murphy. This case was tried once before,
when the jury failed TO arrive at a conclusion The
plaintiffs, Messrs. Jafiray Co., are extensive dry
goods merchants, doing business on Broadway.
Some time since they imported quantity OF lace;
the law Of 1864 puts duty OF sixty per cent on
BLK lace. The plaintiffs say that the lace they
imported, and upon which duty OF sixty per cent
was levied. is not SILK lace, although silk is CON-
pOnent part or the manufacture, but a combination
o. thread and silk, known In the commercial world
as thread lace, dutiabe, under the act of 1881, at
only thirty per cent The plaintiffs paid the larger
duty under protest, and have brought the present
suit 10 recover the excess The case will occupy
two or three days.
In the United states Circuit Court yesterday G.
b. Ogden was fined 500 for non.attendance as
Juror.
IN the United States District Court yesterday
there was no case ready for trial, and Judge
Blatchord remarked how ridiculous 1t was to be
calling the calendar day after day when there was
no case ready, though there was plenty OF business
upon the calendar II counsel would only make
some exertlon to dispose OF 1t.