The star. (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1874-1875, 1875-01-05
Ia W REPORT.
COMMON PLEAS.

The Court met in joint session yester
day and announced the order Of business
for the January term. In order to expe
dite the business as much as possible
and 'relieve the distressed condition OF
the judicial SYSTEM" Judge Avery, pre-.
siding Judge, announced that when the
dockets in the submitted.cases rooms
were disposed of jury cases would be
tried in these rooms. Te, make the pro-
iect feasible would require that when
cases in the submitted rooms were
reached they must either be tried or con-
| tinued. Counsel may avail themselves
| of this information.
PROBATE COURT.
The will OF John Henning was pro-
bated yesterday.
The will Of Henry Gentsch was also
probated. Elizabeth Gentsch was ap-
pointed executrix. Estate, so, 900 in per-
sonalty.
Before Judge Murdock-The following
are the names Of the Grand Jury impan-
neled yesterday: II. M. Bates, foreman /;
Frank Hill, B. Ii. Shoemaker, Jno- Smei-
Ian, Peter Dietrich, John Sparks, John
B. Krawith, Z. Sharkey, Thomas Duck
wall, j. A. Hill, s. Ell. Frank, James
Grammar, C..S. Brown, Richard Butler
and john Weaver.
Nc Manus. This was an application for
divorce on the ground of extreme cruel
ty. The parties were married in 1866
The case was heard on dispositions and
submitted.
Margaret Miller v..Albert Miller. This
was all application on the ground of will
fui absence and gross neglect of duty.
A decree was granted on the former
ground.
BroXterman v. Mary Ana Broxterman.
This was an application for divorce. on
the ground of willrul absence. The de-
fendant is the crazy woman,who for years
past has been in the habit of accosting
men on the street and trying to induce
them to enter the bonds OF WedIock with
her. She was married to her husband in
1856, and left him the following year.
The Court said he had known the de-
fendunt about the Courthouse ior num-
Der OF years. He thought she was inca
pable of appreciating any act done, and
hence the charge of willful absence could
not be made out, the evidence of mental
imbecility existing at the time of the
marriage contract. And for that reason,
also, no charge of fraud in the marriage
contract could now be set up. The case,
however, was taken under advisement.
UNITED STATES COURT.
The District Attorney yesterday
brought two civil suits on behalf of the
United States against F. A. Cunning
ham, Preble county, and his bondsmen.
The first petition states that in 1856 the
defendant was appointed Paymaster OF
the United States Army, and gaye the
requisite bond of twenty thousand dol
lars, with Daniel Marshman, Enoch Tay-
lor, r. S. Cunningham, John V.Camp-
bell, Daniel Glierer, Levi Caro-, j. B.
Stephens, John Miller, James Campbell,
Jonathan Switzer and Robert Milford,
who are named as defendants. The
Government claims that Cunningham
owes it, $25S 92, Tor which sum suit is
brought.
The second petition seeks to recover
from him 2,744 30 on the same grounds,
but which was retained by him while
acting under different appointment
and with different bond. The bonds
men in this case are Robert Milford,
John V. Campbell, Daniel Warshap,
Jonathan Switzer, Jesse b. Stephens
and Levi Caro-.
Judge Swing heard one important mo-
ton; and adjourned Court till this morn
ing.