The Cambria freeman. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1867-1938, 1876-09-22


disposed to treat us-that is, as if we had
ceased TO exist as a public iournal-we trans
ier 10 our columns the following report fur
nished TO that paper by legal gentleman in
! inns .nis place, OF the doings in Court from the
| time our paper went to press on Thursday
afternoon until the close of the session at II
o CLOCK on the following Saturday forenoon:
p. reter ): krise Us. A. Saupp and Sarah E.
burns, doing business a. Saup Co Action
preueh, TO recover a balance alleged by plain
TN to be due him from defendants on a cor ira ct
70 run logs into Chest creek, IN Clearfield town
snIp-saId contract having been entered into
several years ago with John ], Burns, since de-
ceased who was their agent. The suit also in
: cIuded damages arising from said agent not al
lowing piaintiff TO put in as many logs az he at
a nrst cnn,racted .,in for The amount claimed was
OF y few minutes that Mr.. X rise was entitled to
! John f. Holmes VS.. Bernard McGee This
was an action on the case to recover damages
Tor alleged non-performanceo of contract The
piaintin had bought land from the defendant
under an article of agreement which provided
! that the deed should be made as soon as said
land couic he surveyed, and the former gave
! Judgment notes as security for the purcha Sc
money; The defendant entered the notes and
when the h's one became due, an execution
was Issued against defendant i'm the iudgme nt
but W no is plaintiff in this action. MIR. Holme s
came INTO court and obtained "A rule ~ show
cause why said writ should not he STAYED until
McGee world fulfill his part OF the original
contract by executing a good and sun mcient
! deed. Proceedings werea ccordingIy stspand ded
and in the meantime NcGee fief. a deed i'm
Court, when he proceeded TO collect his juip-
ment. which Holmes paid under protest, alley
frg that there was misdescrs spton i'm the. dec,
which described the land as lying i'm Barr
township Cambria county. whereas il was sitI
ated in Pine township, Indiana county and
now suit was brought to recover damages sIis-
taned by reason of this suspicion east upou I he
title. After all the evidence of the piaintif was
IN the Court directed his counsel to take a non
suit, for the reason that IL they had a remedy
they had mistaken the Proceedings by which to
obtain il.
The next case taken up was Francscus Hum
derich VS.. Egidus Levy. of Barr township
This was an action on the ca Sc. with promises
and the allegation OF the plaintiff was that i'm
Noyemt er last the defendant visited New York
where plaintiff then rcsidec-Jhe being n moor
German washcrwonan- while there Mr.
Levy became acq qiainted with her. He pro-
posed To marry tue lady. and held out as an in
ducement that he was the owner of real astate
In Penn'yivania. To the value OF $4,000. An
to execute y good title for one third of his pro.
perty, providing she would marry him. For
certain reasons the nuptial ceremony was rot
performed at the time. hut fter ,ac defendant
returned home he sent word for her to nees
be consummated. Miss Humid riich came ON.
and Levy induced her to accompany him To
the village OF St Nicholas, in Barr t"wnsbip a
family named Miller, who had come with her
from New York. being along. MIR Miller had
bought land from defendant, and. was then on
his way to take possession OF IL. The articles
by which the one third OF Mr.. Levy's possess
sions were to be transferred were to be written
next morning. aud the two remained together
That night. When daylight came he treated
her In a very rude and indecent manner. and
lie with butcher knife which he held in his
hand. This was the story OF the woman, and
remarked that he always had been and was
ready now 10 marry her Some further testi-
mony was bdhuced, and. at l0 o'clock, p. NJ.
Court adjourned until the following morning.
FRIDAYS s SESSION.
Upon re assembling the hearing of the above
c,ise was continued and at half past II O'Clock
the evidence was all III. An adjournment was
ordered until O'Clock, p. ~. when the arvu.
nients OF respective counsel were made snd
the charge given to the jury. After an at,-
sen = of about one hour they came in with
verdict in favor az plaintiff ia the sum of ai,0
k use of he r ,f t.s, .la,
& Rsmcy) We. Michael Bracken and Thomas
Bradiey. was next in order. The history Of this
Brown entered into articles or agreement with
the defendants. by which be was to s-il them a
steaDl-cugiUe and w-mill then located near
NIne,eh Ststion, and the same were to be de-
Hvertd on the cars at the village named. The
consideration was fixed at Al,fuO. but owing to
some previous dealings between the parties,
the su ouut was changed To si,s0o. Subsequent
Mctauley and Hnney- who were doing business
at Osceola, but who resided in Altoona. He
fendauts, Dracken " Bradley, of tho transrer
Some time after this the iatuer gave their note
same to McCauey Ramey, and got their per-
mission 10 use said mote. he was in urgent
need of money AT the time. They took his In
diviiuai note for portion of the amount he
ewcd them aud no agreed to pay the balance
The paper was discounted not long after this
at Il bank IN Altoona. and Brown sent McCau-
portion OF the same. Tr. BIZ alleged that
the money necessary To meet said check in
x, H..
time it forwarded, but that afterwards,
bcif < Embarrassed, he drew il out a nd used rhe
fund.-, aud n nT~ Mct'aulcy Ramey Goth eek
and note az lag Len otehoi. ore d claim THAI
they did not release Bracken & Bradley In their
Transactions with Brown. and hence they
s"fght TO recover rom defendants named. The
latter In the meantime had paid the note for
sisI ed arnent The jury retired, ana. after
short abssncc, brought la Il verdict in favor OF
The mex. case taken up was Billings Vince
lock vs. l.. :: l. wis ard Henry K. Lewis, doing
brought toy plaintiffs to recover the amount OF
note drawn by dc:endants in their favor.
lewis & Go. first offered 10 verify by affidavit
special plea To- the effect rtat no partnership
existed between the parties mentioned us be-
longing to said firm, and leave was granted by
the Cuurt, wnereupOn tbs piaintixS alleged
surpriS., anG the case was continued.
The Fiist National Bank OF Altoona vs.. Fred
the aefendant had held "a note for s250 drawn
in his favor by a man named Reed, which WAS
discounted at the bank; but As said note was
afterwards protested, the plaintiffs sought 10
hold Defendant, as he was cudursec, MIR. VOW
there was not sufficient notice "f protest, az he
had never received any Information that such
was the cast. Plaintiffs alleged that they had
mailed notice TO him. at his proper address,
as near rs they could ascertain It,
SATURDAYS SESSION.
Upon Court assembling at o'clock on Sat
III lddy.morninR. lhe arguments OF counsel and
charge OF Judgs Dean were delivered, ana the
matter went IL the jury. They were absent on
~ n few minutes, when verdict of s.S0.09 WAS
returned in favor or the bank-that including
The last cause on the list was then called. be-
ing an action OF ejectment between George b.
StineuIau and Martina otineman VS.. Frank
kurtz. SUIT was broLght hy plaintiffs to recpv-
e a lot OF ground claimed ny them IN summer
hill township, and the evidence in the matter
occupied the attention OF Court Sut snort
time. when the jury was directed TO fnd for
the piuiIitirs the land described In writ. bur
that the defendant not in the open aud
torIous possession OF the same as as conten-
plated u law. The question ms to where the
costs should fall was reserved, and III Ii clock,
a. VI Court finally adj burned.
If ONLY HAD HEALTH.-Many one
wishes fOf good health without making use
of the proper means To obtain it. Reader.
whoever you are. go now whilst this notice
il acting your mind and employ Dr.
~ of p r..il no h l.