Connecticut western news., 1876-08-18
Charley Ross in sharon.-Our readers

Charley Ross in sharon.-Our readers perhaps may remember the remark made by Zone of the Bay Ridge burglars, who was shot while burglarizing a residence, that Charley Ross was still alive, and in the keeping of a man, and it was thought that if this burglar had lived few hours longer than he did, he might have been induced, knowing that he was really going to dle of his wounds. to have given the name of this man who had the boy, and perhaps other information that might have led to the re- covery of the boy, but he died too soon for that. It was, however, subsequently, ascer- tained in some way, that man by the name of Parker was the one alluded to by the burglar, and that he (Parker) was un- occasionally one of the party who abduct- ed the boy, and the police have for long time past been in search of him. The New York officials first got track of Parker in Philadelphia, but ascertalned he had gone to Boston. From Boston. where it was found he had been living with woman Ca squaw) whom he called his wife, and a little boy, for some months, he was tracked to Chatham, N. Y., and thence to Ancram. Monday he was found by two men, one of whom was said to be New York officer, in the suburbs of Sharon. Parker came to that place in April lasA and has worked about there more or less as painter, and it was noticed at times bis conduct was quite strange. It was also observed by those who lived near them, that the squaw was always very cautious about permitting the boy to get out of her reach at any time, wt Id not permit him to play with the children, and when she went into the field after berries, or went anywhere as for that matter, the boy always accompanied her.
 When the two men arrived last Monday afternoon and questioned the squaw about the boy Parker was absent from home at the time), she at first said the child was hers, but atterward said 1t was not. The boy is of fair complexion, and on roll ing Up the sleeve of his coat it was found that mole, answering the description given by his father in the circular which he sent throughout the country, was on his arm where it was represented to be by MT. Ross. His hair was cut close. It is said further, that when Parker, who was away painting when the men came to the house, heard in some way that two men were at his ouse, he dropped his brushes and ran home as rapidly as possible.
 The whole family was arrested and taken the same night to Pine Plains. The appar- ent age of the boy (six years old) and his size, allowing for the increase of growth for the two years he has been absent from his parents, his remarkably fair complex Ion, the mole on his arm, the confused statement of the squaw in relation to him, tend strongly to confirm the impression that the veritable Charley Ross is really and in- deed found, and found in Sharon in our own Litchfeld county. To be sure, the case may prove, as all the others thus far where it was thought the lad was surely found, an error, but everybody with spark of humanity in their souls will hope the clue is this time the correct one. i LATER.-A despatch from Poughkeepsie says man giving the name of R. Hibborne of Philadelphia, states he is well acquaint. ed with the Ross family, and the boy is a picture of his brother. Telegrams are sent to Philadelphia.
 Falls Village District Court -Districl Court commenced on Monday of last week with the trial of case entitled Hunt and Lake vs George Thompson. The cases o1 Wm. c. Welton ys John T. Swift, P Mundy vs T. M. Morgan, J. s. Powers & Go. vs F. M. & E. J. Hicks were disposed of This week Will be occupied in trial ot court cases. A jury IS summoned for nex Tuesday to try the case of John w. Root vs Ezra M. Rowland ct al. The actior was tried last term, resulting in a disagree ment of the jury. The following list of cases is to be tried at this place:
 John W Rood ct ux vs B M Rowland e al. For plaintiffs McM, A D Warner; fol defendants Turrill, Cothren.
 Chas H Futile ct ux vs Isaac M Bartram For plaintiffs, Smith & Warner for de
 fendants, Sedgwick, Andrews, Hughes.
 Isaac N Bartram vs Chas H Futile. Fo plaintiff. Hughes, Sedgwick, Andrews fo defendant, Smith $ Warner.
 COURT.
 Hunt and Lake vs Geo Thompson a. Flo
 plaintiffs, Hardenbergh, Roraback; for de
 fendaEt, Hurlbut, Dean.
 Thomas Peters vs David s Stewart. Flo
 plaintiff, Hardenbergh, Warner 6 Warner
 for defendant, A D Warner, Graves. Wm c Melton vs John F Smith a. Flo
 plaintiff. Hurlbut; for defendant, Rora
 back, A D Warner.
 E Martin vs E H Rogers a. For plain 7 tiff, A D Warner; for defendant, Hurbut
 Mundy vs T M Morgan. For plaintiff Roraback; for defendant, Graves 6 Mol rel.
 F J Rossman vs Edwin w Warner a ) For plaintiff, Hardenbergh for defendant
 Roraback.
 JG Powers & Go vs F NJ & E J Hicks ) For plaintiff, Roraback ; for defendant Warner and Warner.
 M E Hunt vs Charles Vantlne. Flo
 plaintiff, Roraback; for defendant, liar denbergh.
 } Robt. R. Thompson vs H Wilbur. Flo plaintiff, Warner and Warner; for defend ant, Roraback.
 J c Wilkinson ct al vs w B Perry Fo
 plaintiff Sedgwick for defendant, Wal
 ner and Warner.
 f Albert J. Bostwick ct al vs Reuben Pal } nelly.
 Ezra I Dudley ct al vs Lyman Munsor M Jewell vs Eugene Wolf. Ellen o Butterly vs Moore c Jewell. Louisa l. Reed vs Hiram E Bartlette ( , Jennie and Frederick Yale vs Wm. Sims
 John. Godfrey vs Morrls Tanner. Horace B Ball, trustee, vs Homer Smith ct al.
 : Ebeu w Chaffee, adm, vs George :. T Griswold.
 Isaac L Hermon vs Owen McGrath a. , Langdon and Co vs Eugene Wolf. Adams and Beckley vs Lewis Howe. Y Alderman Ives ct al vs R P Seymour.