National Republican., 1876-06-13
AstiaaaI gspubIifau
THE COURTS.
supreme court-Geasral Term-Judges wyiis
MacArthur and Humphrava

supreme Court-Geaeral Term-Judges Wyiie,
Macarthur and Humphreys.
The mandate of the Supreme Court in the case
OF Httenhouse VS.. Sweeny was tiled.
The bond of J. r. Sampson as q Justics of the
peace was approved.
DoHling .. Boucher: Sent back to the Equity
Court TO take additional testimony
Boucher vs.. Boucher. Same action.
Henry 7. Saunders vs.. Isaac Lyon. Decree BE-
stephen Fitzgerald vs.. Julia Leisman. Motion
TO quash granted -..rr-s
Emond T. Fisks vs. John G. Bigelow. Judg-
United States, use Of Josephine Turnburke, vs..
George s. Parken. Judgment below affirmed.
Heustis vs.. Grant. Decree Of the court below
corrected IN lew particulars, and then approved.
The United States vs. Benjamin B. HaIleck.
Exceptions on consolidation Of indictments over
The Court was OF opinion that most of the con-
fessiOns should have been excluded from the jury,
and new trial was granted. The fact that-tha-
confessions were obtained by promises Of favor
wa0clearly made out in the evidence Of Mrs.
Bishop. but was eontradieted by another wit
ness. The Court was of the opinion that they
should not have been received under the circum-
stances, and were incompetent.
Justice Ulin dissented as he maintained that
the confessions were admissible.
Judge Wylie did not understand that the testi-
mOny Of the detective (HalD was incompetent,
however obnoxious the manner Of procuring it
Judge Humphreys should give his vote for its
utter and stop it at the the threshold.
whose liberty was in danger. He would exclude
1t as incompetent, on the ground that it was not
policy.
Judge Macarthur had got the idea from the
opinions expressed on the subject, as it was
thought to be such an abuse Of obtaining de-
have been allowed to testify. For himself, he
thought it should not have been received.
Judge Wylie expressed his dissent on that
Point.
Shoemaker vs. District of Columbia. Decree
There was not only irregulartty in the action of
ercised was wholly without law, and the certih-
Gates, in whoseeyer hands they may be, are en-
tirely void. Chief Justice Cartier dissented Ap-
Edwin Gomez, improvement in torpedoes; pat
ent appeals. Decision Of the Patent once af-
CLARK VS.. Eaton. Bill dismissed Appeal
noted.
Dandy vs.. Sharp. Decision below affirmed
Golden VS.. Kimmell. Bill dismissed. Chief
Justice Cartier dissenting In part. Appeal taken.
Nichols VS.. Barber. Demurrer oyerruled. 80
Shedd VS.. OrdEay: Decision reserved;
Decree below affirmed. Judge Humphreys dis
sented. Appeal entered.
COchrane ct al. VS.. Deener ct al. Bill dismissed.
Leavers & Rawlings vs.. Decision of Patent Of
fee; an appeal. Judgment affirmed.
Huntington, trustee, vs.. Walker ct al. Judg-
ment Defow affirmed. Judge Humphreys par
tally dissented.
Job Barnard was admitted to the bar
A rule to govern pleas before justices of the
peace in the landlord and tenant act was adopted.
VIM. H. Dennis and L. @. Williamson were ap-
pointed examiners in ehancery and commission
E. G. Gatchel was appointed a constable. @.
W. HqDbell. J. 5: Windsor and Joshua Banks
were also appointed.
Hall Holden vs.. H. s. Davis motion to
docket and dismiss was entered.
J. T. Shufton, Alex. Richardson, George Rich
ardsOn and Charles Otis were admitted to the bar
The court adjourned until Monday next.
Circuit Court-Judge Humphreys.
~ ri Ind MT byrr
stipulation for plaintiff for 1900, without costs.
Gordon vs. Nailor. Appellee makes deposit.
Sexton and Son VS.. Birch and Carpenter. De-
Culver vs.. FAINT Default
Lloyd VS.. Brewer. Default.
Berry VS.. Lessring. Default.
Hester and Evans vs. Fry. Judgment set aside
Washington Market Company VS.. Summers
Motion to quash writ allowed. Appeal to Gen.
eral Term.
Msttingly vs.. Edwards. Motion for new trial
oyerruled.
Criminal Court-Judgs Macarthur.
Owing to the lengthy session of the Court in
General Term the court did not meet until D. m.
ericE NJ Goiiiday Ian appea Wss IsS reopened er 90
the defendant paying costs. Similar action was
taken in the cases of Peter DOpneIly and Thomas
Holmes.
On motion of Col VIM. A. Cook, the case of
Gen. o. E. Babeock was set for trial on tae 10Th Of
September next.
CASE OF CHARLES @. FISHER.
The trial of Charles G. Fisher was taken up
The accused was indicted in two cases. first on the
10th Of September, 1875, in taking and carrying
away certain records, papers and proceedings of .
court Of justice of the United States to wit: tho
Supreme Court of this District, the papers in the
case of the United States VS.. George A. Chris
tian; also, presentment of the grand jury in the
same case, the papers in the case Of John Dalton,
John prainard, Wesley Fry, Samuel johnson,
Frank King, Moses Anderson, VIM. II. Ferguson,
John Rheem, Margaret Riley, Elias Rascher Ed
ward Jackson, Bartholomew Noonan, Washing
ton Holmes, Charles W. Thomas Joseph Spear,
John Brown, James A. Hoffman, Daniel Brown,
Augustus Lafontaine, James LafOntaine, John
Kotzel, VIM. II. Lain, George Wimsatt, Richard
Il. Lloyd, George Schwein, Edward Roach, Geo.
". ROseberry, James A. Conner, Frank King,
VIM. Starr, Joseph T. K. Plant, Geo. F. Cham
der Henry Schwein, VIM. Carey, John Bensin-
ger, Daniel Sullivan, VIM. Burke, Peter Miller,
Michael King and Richard L. Thompson.
The second Indictment charges that on the 10th
OF September, 1875, Charles G. Fisher did, with
intent to stea carry away records in the cases of
jeremiah Costello, Thomas Curran, otherwise
called John Harvey; Jacob Richardson and Simon
Denty.
On motion of the District Attorney, the two in
dictments were consolidated.
General Hinkle then entered a motion to quash,
on the ground that it was n statutory OfenSe and
that in the Indictment the words Of the statute
had not been followed.
After hearing argument the Court overruled
the motion. The defense noted an exception.
Adjourned till to-day.