Middletown transcript., 1876-12-09

-
/, and George V. Massey, father and brother
:. in-law of D. Woodall), John G. Corbit and
J. E. G. Fenimore, besides small note OF som'
= $40, to which was appended the name Of W
v Mffin. Ut was this little note that firs
q aroused the suspicious Of the bank officers,
!, though one of the directors had intimated
y fears of wrong some time before.) What the
I amount is that was obtained on these fraudu-
4 lent notes, is not yet definitely kpown. 1t is
estimated at various agures from $4,000 up
+: ward to pretty high sum. Some Of the
0 principle victims were the Odessa ($750) and
8 Middletown ($2oo) Banks, Charles Tatman,
Esq, Of Odessa Isl, ,1oo), N. Williams ($35o)
, G. E. Hukill (S45o), Jacob Tome $4,000,
Charles Tatman, Jr., ($25o), besides some in
Wilmington and other places. Some OF
these, we understand, have been settled
through the agency of Messrs. John Woodall
and G. v. Massey. The forging was all done
with evidently well practised hand, for SO
} well was the counterfeiting done that persons
who were perfectly familiar with the sigma
lures used did not recognize the fraud, and it
} was somewhat difficult to distinguish the gen.
uine from the counterfeit when they were
placed side by side.
What could ever have induced General
Woodall to have adopted SO criminal and
dangerous means of procuring funds for the
prosecution of his business is an unfathom-
able mystery. Far better would it have been
had he let his business fail and his effects be
sold than to have taken such q method to
continue it. He was generally liked and
stood well in the opinions of the people and
his fall was shock to the whole community,
and while all condemned bis crime, the great
est regret is expressed for his unfortunate
yielding 10 temptation.
Proceedings OF Court.
The Superior Court of this county began its
fall term at New Castle on Monday, with
Chief Justice Comegys and Judge Houston on
the bench. The greater part of the morning
session was occupied in calling over the Trial
List and disposing of the various cases there
on. Of the whole ls5 only l3 were set down
for trial at this term. The rest were either
continued, discontinued, settled, or in some
other way disposed Of B. Nields, ESQ.,,
wanted to remove the ease of Charles Mcgee
Us. George Mccall to the u S. Circuit Court
but Chief Justice Comegys refused to allow
him to do SO. Edward Kennard, Clifford
James and John 81. Frazier were admitted to
tho hor an fion nd Tar r. Al
landigham, of Ohio, on certificate. The newly
elected sheriff. Isaac Grubb, Esq, bonded for
$4,000 his securities being William Herbert,
Benjamin G. Pearce, John Neatly, Samuel G. |
Chandler and W. R. Lyman.
The first case called for trial was that of J. |
S Rowbotham cs. B. G. Pearce. Patterson
for plaintiff; Whiteley for defendant. The
facts of the case are as follows: In 1873, |
March 25th, B. G. Pearce leased house, No.
East Third street, in Wilmington, to John
S. Rowbotham for one year, reserving for bis
own use the front room, cellar room for stor-
age in which said Pearce kept saloon. June
oath of the same year Rowbotham moved al
leging that the noise in defendants saloon
caused by gaming and profanity rendered it
impossible for his family to remain. When
Rowbotham moved. Pearce attached his goods
and made him give security for the years
rent. When Rowbotham attempted to sublet,
Pierce notified all comers that be would not
permit them to occupy. When Rowbotham
put up notice "to let'' Pearce supplemented
it with notice that 'letting was not per-
missible." and Rowbotham sued for dam
ages and Pearce confessed the facts and de-
INJURED. The demurrer was ordered and now
it is mere question of damage. Quite a
number of witnesses were examined and the
case occupied considerable time.
Court adjourned at 6p. m.
SECOND DAY, Dec. 5th.
Rowbotham Us. Pearce was resumed, and
testimony was heard on both sides until IL
o'clock. Counsel then argued the case, and
at 10 oclock it was given to the jury Dur
ing the noon recess the jury came in with a
verdict for plaintiff for 1886 SO and costs.
The case Of James G. Knowles vs. Samuel
G. Pierce, rsplevin, was then called. George
Gray, Esq, for plaintiff, and Charles B. Lore,
ESQ.,, for defendant. The facts of this case
are as follows:
In May, 1874, one Francis L. Uric, brother
in-iaw of plaintiff, rented the "Keg Mills" on
the Brandywine, from E. l. Dupont l. Co.,
and commenced work. After time failing
to pay, the goods in the mill were attached
BY his hands under foreign attachment, aud
BY Dupont under landlords warrant
Knowles replevined the goods, claiming prop
,rty, and the evi lence showed that under
between Uric and Knowles, that
Knowles furnished the material to be worked
up by Uric at a charge Of so much per yard.
The defence alleged fraud.
During the argument of the case by coun-
'el, Court adjourned until next morning at
10 o'clock
During the afternoon David c. Rose, the
new Coroner, bonded in the sum of $3,000
THIRD DAY, Dec. 9Th.
The consideration Of the case Of Knowles
's. Pearce was resumed, Mr.. Gray occupying
IN hour and twenty-five minutes in making
the closing speech. The court charged the
ury that if they found the property to be in
Knowles possession, then that part which was
'ent for the purpose of manufacture, was not
liable either to attachment or distress, but
whatever part was not sent for such purpose,
while not being liable to attachment was
till distrainable for rent. At IL 40 the jury
etred, and up to the adjournment of Court
lad not returned.
The Court ruled in this that if the plaintiff
proved part of the goods net liable that proof
,arried costs with it
In Gilbert Us. Mote, application Of a judg I
nent creditor for rule to show cause why
he coart should not set aside SherifFs sale.
Argument was had by counsel, and the court
lecided that judgment creditor was not en-
;<lad n <vaf uoh n rula