New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-02-19
COURT RECORD.
COURT RECORD.
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY Is, 1876.
United States Supreme Court.
The following were rendered Monday,
Eohruarv IA.

United States Supreme Court.
The following were rendered Monday,
February IA:
BT CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE.
's No. S5l. Eliza M. Warfeld, plaintiff in
error, vs.. John and Charles Chaffee-Error
to the Supreme Court of Louisiana. Writ
dismissed for want Of jurisdiction.
No. 1888 John L. Macauley ct sl., appel
liant, vs. Charles Clinton ct al.-MOti0n to
advance the cause granted.
United States Circuit Court.
Presentation. w. B. Woods, circuit
judge.
United States vs.. Ferdinand Duden-
observation-disclosures from Germania Ma
try of q nOlle prospqui, they were ordered
to be corrected by the insertion of the
words: ''And before the said cause had
been given to the said jury, the said seventh
count was in all things Withdrawn and not
submitted to the said jury"
ThomasJ. Owen & Co. vs. Montljo Broth
ers.-On trial. Charge Of court to be given
February l9, 1876.
United States Va. George M. Bayley and
in keeping distillery without license.
Bail bonds signed by William NJ. Letchford
and A. Bald win.
F. F. Case. receiver, VS.. John Reed
Cause to be shown February &c, why new
trial should not be granted.
N. W. Casey, receiver. vs.. Mrs. NJ. San
tini.-Judgment for 5000.
Same vs.. c. Mehle. Judgment for $3.50
E. d. Morgan vs. New Orleans, Mobile
and Texas Railroad Compapy.-Petition
filed January "a, 1876, on the note of the
company for 500 900, dated March 20, 1872,
for four months, signed by John j. Howell,
secretary, and given in New York. Verdict
for plaintiff for 100000 with interest at
five per cent from July %, 1879.
The grand and petit jaries were dis
charged till F. bruary 81.
Supreme Court.
Adjourned to Monday, February 81.
Superior District Court.
Judge Lynch opened and closed court in
consequence Of the illness of Judge Haw-
kins, and continued all cases by preference.
Superior Criminal Court.
NoLLE PRosEQUI ENTERED.
w. C. Fulham, breach of trust, three
cases; Van Figeneen and Florence Fisher,
interfering with an officer.
INDICTMENTS.
Perjury-David Wilde, Christopher N.
Wilson.
Forgery-Christcpher N. Wilson.
NOT TRUE BILLS.
State Va Robert Lieffer.-Manslaugbt
Killing E. Piper, q drayman January II,
1876. Accused was engineer on the New
Orleans, Mobile and Texas railroad, and
his train ran over the d. ceased.
State VS.. John oppersmith-Running
over and disabling Christian Kern, a child
two years old, at the corner of Aununcia-
ton aud Second streets, the accused then
being driver of the Crescent City Railroad
Company.
State va George w. Bancker-Offeripg q
bribe of $500 to Henry Cannonge, clerk in
the Office of recorder of conveyances, De-
cember 90, 1875. to alter, falsfy and ante
date q convey ance Of goods from Wallace
L. Co.
TRUE BILLS.
Safe vs.. Jack Lee.-Assault and battery,
in Algiers, accused being a constable of the
Fifth Justice Court, w. L. Thompson. at
the time, on August VigperOn, February
II, 1876.
State vs.. Alfred Caps Murder. Jury
out.
First District Court.
INFORMATION.
Petty larceny-Wiliam Cooper.
second District Court.
Succession Of Louis Duverge Wharton
opened.
to be emancipated.
Fourth District Court.
Louis Lorain va. Eugene Deschamps.-
Judgment far $l55 l8.
H B. Clafiin vs. Feiber & Gonsenheim.-
Judgment for $685. so.
John P Haas vs. l.. Marchand ct al
| Judgment for $500.
Fifth District Court.
Judge Cullum rendered the following de-
cisiOn:
James C. Cooper vs. Payne, Huntington
e. Co.
The plaintiff alleges that the defendants
| owe him $4,000 in solido, with interest illegal,
| of course) from September !, 1871, for this:
Morehouse, az surety tor one Sandel, who,
| to secure him against rick for 80 doing, con
tracted to ship to these defendants fifty
bales of cotton, the proceeds of which, or
| $4,000, they agreed to hold for petitioner
protection and subject to his order, in the
event OF his having to pay the injunction
bond which he had signed as surety for said
Sandel. The plaintiff alleges that he was
obliged to pay the amount OF the bond, and
had so done. He prays for judgment tor
the said sum OF $4,000, with interest. The
defendants plead the general issue, and
further deny that the fifty bales of cotton
referred to in the petition were ever
shipped to, received or sold BY defendants,
or that they are in any manner indebted
unto petitioner as alleged. They pray for
! dismissal of plaintiffs suit, for costs and
for general relief.
On the nineteenth of October 1869, these
defendants wrote to plaintiff, saying: "Dr
William Sandel has informed Us that you
have gone on his bond for $4,000, and tina,
| he wishes to ship to us, for your security
fifty bales OF cotton. This is to inform you
that we will hold the cotton or the amount
of the bond, $4,000, in our hands until you
notify US that you are released and the
money is at the disposal of Dr.. Sandel."
The facts material to this issue are thai
J the defendants were the factors of DIR. San
dell before this transaction and since. Tha,
DR.. SAndel did ship them ninety bales O.
cotton during that season, but gave no in
structions at the time of the shipment as tC
the fifty bales he had promised.
The entire ninety bales were sold and th'
proceeds paid to Sandal or on his account
Cooper was cond smned to pay the amount
Of his suretyship. On the second of De
cember, 1871, the defendants were notified
! of the fact by letter written them by ID.
Morgan, and requesting them to pay ove
$4,000 TO Messrs. Race, Foster & E. +. Mer
rick.
Plaintiffs counsel maintain that from tn
fact Of having consented to receive tift.
bales of cotton, having received ninety
and having agreed to hold proceeds amount
ing to $1,000, and Cooper having been com
PEELED to pay the amount of the bond OF in
Junction is3ooO), the obligation Of the de
fendants is complete, and that they ar
liable to Cooper.
Defendants' counsel maintain that the let
ter to Cooper was sent to Sandel, to be use,
by him or not, and that neither Sandei no
Cooper ever notified them that they ha,