The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-11-08

Judge sedgwick-Nos. 237 2d7 l2oR, 81 ia, Iso.
$50, o27 $50 Parts and a.~ASjournea for the
term.
COMMON PLEAs-GEsrRAL TERa-Hed by Chief JUS
tice r. Daily and Judges j. II. Daily ana Van Hoe
ITO, l2l, l23, los
COMMON PLEAs-EoUIry TERM-Held by Judge Lar
Nos. 81.
COMMON PLEAs-TRIAL TEnM-Part Held by Judge
n NOD Oh 400. s67, rs, 1885, 96I 1857,
ll05, 1885, 1915, 339, 926, TT, 1l72 4S0 Parts and
3.-Adjourned Tor the term
MAhisE CouRT-fRIAL TERM-Part Held by Judge
snerdan.-Nos. l6sl, 40, 1866 1885, 1882 1902 1875
1889, 294o5s 1896 1s90s, 1872 204s 1850 2234 Part
2235 2as6 223s 223o 22io ssai 2s4l aa45 2al9 ESQ
37lS Part 3-Held by Judge Shea.-Nos 1862 3522,
a3s isoi 2is 2i7s, 2lsa $40, 2lel, 2oal, 1860 2ls2
COURT OF GENERAL sEssioSs-Part Hold by
Judge Sutherand-The People vs. Thomas Pelher,
robbery; Same vs. Hugh Linnon, robbery; Same vs.
yonn Collins, ieionious assault and battery; Same vs.
Raymond Monaco felonlous assault and battery;
terry; Same W.. Patrick Rooney, robbery; Same
Thomas Morris, grand larceny; Same vs. John o'Don-
neil and Joseph Hseemyer. grand larceny; same VS..
Johann Frundt, grand laccny same Charles Will
Jams, grand larceny; Same vs. KITTY Jennings
larceny iron person; Same vs. John Hecry, larceny
from person; Same vs. Della Corners, larceny from
person; Same Vs. Wm Thompson larceny from person;
Same VS.. Hattie Elliott. disorderly house. Part p
Held by Judge John X. HacketI-Thc People vs. viii.
lam Poole. homicide; Same va. Joseph Font, ct al,
homicide; Same VS.. John Leddy, ielonious assault;
Same vs. Eugene D. AngcIl leonious assault; Same
COURT OF OYER AND TERMNER-Hed by Judge
Brady.-The People VS. Robert l.. Case. perjury; Same
vs. Isaac D. Allen, perjury; Same VS.. Thomas >. Lam
bort, perjury.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
WASHINGTON, Nov. .. 1877.
On motion OF Mr.. Enoch rottcn, Mr. Earl T. Finch
and Mr. Charles Barber, of Oshkosh, Wis, wore admit
tod TO practise rs attorneys and counselors OF this
Court.
On mt Of Mr. Matt hews
bell and Mr. Charles ". Baker, Of Cincinnati, OHIO,
admitted TO practise as attorneys and counse ors
OF this Court
The following cases wore heard to-day
No 10. Cairo ana Fulton Railroad Company vs.
Hecht, &c. Error to the supreme Court OF Arkan-
sas. by the act OF incorporation OF the railroad
pany II was provided that process should DO served
on Il by leaving copy to the address OF the president
at the principal Office of the corporation. By act
OF 1865 was provided that might be served
by leaving copy with clerk, In case higher olicer
could not be found such was tho case when process
was served IN This action, and accordingly copy
lett with clerk. The company, believing this in.
sufficient, allowed default to be taKen and the Court
sustaining the service, the writ OF maintains
that the provision 10 service the charter was
contract with the company made by tho State. and
that neon petent for a subsequent Legislature
to change the form OF SERVICE because IL action
impair ny the obligations of the contract and there
forc prohibited by tho federal constitution U. NJ.
Rose for plaintiff In error, defendant not appearing
No. so. Imperial Fire Insurance Company, OF Lon
don, vs.. Fargo President nc. Error 10 the Circuit
action was brought by Fargo, as President OF tho
American Merchants Union Express Company, to re-
cover on two policies OF insurance ISSUED by the
pany on goods Tor transportation. provision OF the
policy was that no loss should be paid coli
lsion except IRE ensue and then only Tor the loss
damage by nre also that should be paid arising
from petroleum or other explosive oils The decara
ton IN tho case averrcd that the fire was occa-
stoned by none OF the prohibited causes while the
goods were in course OF transportation over the
New York Central and Hudson RIVER Railroad.
The defense was that the fire was occrsloned by The
n thnrs v MI hten
being on freight train OF the road, were thrown on
by the breaking oil rall ono oil tho tanks OF which
fell upon the other track aud came In collision with
the express tram. ana being by some cause
destroyed the tram, Including the goods lost Upon
this evidence the Court directed verdict Tor the de-
fcndant In error (plantH below ana that ruling Is
assigned as error here, the plaintiff maintaining that
the cause OF the fire was petroleum, ana that 1t was
within tho prohibition OF the policies. n. B. Hoxle
for plaintiff IN error; Cole Il Nash tor defendants.
No $50 Chester A. Arthur, Collector, &C, plaintiff
In error Vs. Joseph Roscnthal Ell VI In error TO tho
Circuit Court OF tho United States Tor the Southern
District OF New York.--on motion Of Mr.. Edward
Hartley writ OF error docketed and dismissed, with
COSTS.
No. 70. Thomas l.. Clarke appellant, VS. The United
States-lhis cause was ar ued by Mr.. Enoch Totem
OF counsel for the appellant and by Mr. Solicitor Gen.
era Philips Tor the appellee.
NO. 81. Fanny Boecher, excoutrix, &C., plaintiff In
error, vs.. DAVID Wetherby ct a.-Tbis cause ar
gued by Mr. Charles Barber oil counsel Tor the defend
ants in error and submitted ON printed arguments by
Mr.. Charles W. Felkcr Tor the plaintiff IN error
No. So Joseph Movius, Surveyor, &c, plaintiff in
error, VS.. Chester A. Arthur, Collector, &c.--Ths
was argued by Mr.. Edward Hartley, OF counscl
Tor the plantin In error, ana by Mr. Solicitor General
Philips Tor the defendant In error.
No SO. The state OF Tennessee ex rel Jacob Bloom
stcin plaintiff IN error. vs. Thomas IL. Sneed Col
Iector, &c-ihc argument OF this cause com
menccd ny Mr.. McP. smith, OF counsel Tor the paintin
IN error.
Adjourned until tomorrow.