The Lambertville record. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1872-1968, 1875-09-22

left eye by a thorn and has since lost the use
of it.
CAPT. JACK.
HUNTERDoN COUNTY CouRT.-0n going to
press last week, our report closed with the
case of James N. Pidcock VS.. Samuel Klotz
the entire week, and the Court charged the jury
on Monday morning. The jury remained out
until Tuesday morning, when they came in
to court and asked for an explanation of some
part of the evidence. They again retired and
returned in about an hour, stating that they
found NO cause for action by the plaintiff, and
verdict of about 81, 200 for the defendants.
This case has been one of the most difficult
and intricate for jury to comprehend and
decide that has lately been tried in the Coul is
of this county.
Richard Bloom Executor of John Aller,
deceased, v. Peter II. Aller. This was suit
upon promissory note and book account.
The defendant claimed that the note was the
property of the heir of Mrs. Sheets, the
mother of John Alters wife, and not the plain
tiffs, he only having came into the possession
of it because Mrs. Sheets died at his house !;
the defendant also offset book account.
Before the trial was finished the jury was dis
missed and the matter will be decided by the
Court
Joseph Fritts VS.. George W. Bowlby Ell al.
By agreement of counsel, this case viii be ar
gued at the Warren County Circuit Court.
John Ramsey VS.. Jacob l.. Everett. No
defence was interposed in this case, and a
verdict rendered for the plaintiff for$ St7:s1-
the suit being upon several promissory notes
signed by the defendant.
Michael Dempsey VS.. Charles McFadden.
This case was settled by the parties. S
Alexander Probasco Jr., vs. Henry Field.
In this case, the counsel of the respective
parties did not dispute the facts, the jury was
excused and the case tried before the Court.
John K. Large VS.. Thomas Iron Company.
This case was settled by the parties
Noah H. Blackwell VS.. Bloomfield Black
we'll In this case no defence was made, the
note was proven, and verdict for the plaintiff
for $904.04 given by the jury.
B. N Pickell VS.. j. N. Pidcock. The de-
Aonuaiis nv % W pos' '-'s sun " P"J
ment OF the COSTS py nin' naeeFiai wisnsss
being absent. The motion was granted.
Samuel Rinehart vs. Joseph vliet, admir-
of Stephen Yard, decd. The parties consent
ed to dispense with a jury in this case, and
have trial before the Court.
Henry =. Apgar 70 george uuilck' ms
SUIT was upon tne nss ~ sne iase 'er" OF
Court nut was postponed on account o. SICK
ness Oh the aelenoah'' ne na''er mas peen
80. = n.hatas - asorrs pa;rh.rt Tast
-. 49,, 49, -. ,.aro oco.,,;ad e ~ tr;s,
go .,..s ss.,ss .vd tha ;srw f.,,;,r - .nrsa
the case was AGAIN set down for trial. On
being called the case was not moved. and the
n,a;nt;ff submitted to a nonsuit. So
Township Of Holland. to the use of DAVID
Kirk vs.. George Crevelinp 81 al A settlement
was effected by the parties in this suit.
william johnson vs.. Thomas e. HINT. "A
ru,e Of reference was ordered to be entered in
this case
+, Humphrey 81 VS.. Joseph B. Carhart.
The plaintiff obtained from one Ferguson a
promissorv note for $3.50. The note had been
oiven by the defendant for Patent he hav-
ing bought the right to sell for Union town
ship, in this county. An agreement was
entered into between Carhart and Ferguson,
by which Carhart was not to pay the note un
til he realized the amount from the sale of the
Patent but this agreement did not effect
any stranger or innocent party obtaining the
note before maturity Verdict for $275.
James Gulick VS.. Alfred Leigh ct al. This