The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-03-07
. case was adjourned till this morning.
SUMMARY or LAW CASES.

Tho Citizens Bank OF Louisiana VS.. Edward Mat
thcws implicated with James 5. Brandcr Jr, and
Samuel l.. ChcmbIess, which arose out OF incidents
during the late war, las been settled and DISCONTINUED
with leave oil Judge Lawreucc
William Maur, No. 40 Essex street, imprisoned,
at the suit OF tho Society for the Reformation of Ju-
vcnile Denquents Tor contempt oil court, in dsobcy-
ing restraining HIN from giving tbeatr
Cal performances. The plaintin got order 10 show
why he should not be discharged, which was
made returnabe on Tuesday next.
In the of o. ". Brennan VS. The Mayor for rent
Of premises Pearl street, when suit defeated.
Judge Lawrence yesterday granted def ndants add
d:tionai allowance OF 1898 So
Judge Lawrence yesterday granted order in tho
suit OF Franklin j. Hall vs. Augustus J. Julard, re-
cciver IN the suit of Berkshire woollen Company
Hoyt, Srragues h Co., authorizing the receiver TO
pay IRON the assets in hts hands per cent of Mr.
Halls claims against Hoyt, Spragucs & Co.
Tho suit OF tho Emma Silver Mining Company VS..
Trcnor W. Park and Others oa trial before Judge
Wallace nd jury in the United States Circuit Court,
Equity Branch, was resumed yesterday. Mr. Park was
again tho stand on his behalf, under The rigid
examination OF Mr. Stous hon He testified that
1872 he had idea Of any litigation arising
in connection with the Emma Mino purchase. Mr..
Stoughton then read letter, written in that year by
the witness. in which he he had Chief Justice
with him, aud that he (Park) knew his party would
be all right any litigation arose. he could have The
opposing party ehJoined. Mr. PARK proceeded to OK
pain the circumstances under which tho letter
written, when the further hcaring OF the case was ad-
journed TIL THIS morning.
Charles Ralston, convicted before Chief Justice
DAVIS November last, uttcring forged Buffalo and
Erie kaIroad bonds was sentenced by Judge Brady,
IN oyer and rermlncr. yesterday, TO live years the
Stale Prison The OF William Connors adj
iourneu consequence OF the absence oil Mr.. Brooke,
until Tomorrow morning.
| n
for divorce before the supreme Court The cuargc Is
adultery at No. 20 Forsyth street with an unknown
woman, and that ueenuant has been IN the naDit OF
/ frcquenns b.wdy houses The defendant, young
man. nov IN san Francisco, Cal. The parties
married IN Hamburg Germany, IN June, 1865. A ref
ercnce was ordered.
John Brown brought SUIT for divorce against his
vile Jane, on the ground OF adultery. Pantin says
they were married IN 1861 ~ Tins city, and that III
1862 the OF No. l34 Elizabeth street, she
mitlcd adultery at various times aud places lucy
have three cnildren alive and three dead The
came up before Judge Lawrence, IN supreme Court,
Chambers yesterday, on motion by The wife Tor ALI
mony Sne says the plnnin abandoned me children; ;
she denies tho charges against her aud she has
been compelled 10 support The children ny washing
ironing and that the paintin brought the SUIT becau
he wants TO marry again. reference Vas APP
The old WInchcl divorce case came up before udgo
Freedman, IN the Superior Court, SPECIAL Term, "A
motion for 900 counsel tees and alimony, pcndento
lite. AS Will be remembered the SUIT IS brought ny
MIR. X. b. Winchcll Tor divorce from his WIFE Eliza
Wnche, on the ground OF alleged adultery with her
iormer attorney. The answer IS a general denial
/
affidavit read behalf OF the defend
ant rccitng the proceedings the Supreme Court
several years ago in similar action against her,
and also rccng The various orders obtained against
the plalntin Tor counsel fee and aimony. Answering
afdavs, reclling the various orders III his Iavor maze
by the supreme Court, alter the pantns present at
tOrney mad been substtutcd were read IN opposition
The Court, after hearing the argument, took The
papers, rescrviDg decision
james W. Boulon has brought suit in tho Supreme
Court against Samuel j Tlden late candidate Tor tho
Presidency. The action Is for merchandise sold and
ed. "A
attorney applied toJudgc Lawrence, in supreme Court,
Chambers yesterday, or an order placing the cause
the SPECIAL Circuit calendar. Counsel, in his
affidavit says the answer general denial. and he
believed 1t made Tor The purpose OF delay, because,
he rs informed and believes, the delcnuant, before
aud since The of the action, has prom
scd TO settle with raintii The order 10 advance the
cause ON the caIcndar was granted
Judge DonohGo holding supreme Court, Circuit, was
busiy occup ed yesterday Ia the trial OF SUIT brought
by Alien Mclean Hamilton. assistant sanitary nspec-
tor ~ 1874, against Amro H. Emo. lhe painif cha ms
81, 900 damages Tor alleged libel IN letter pub
lsncd by tue defendant over the signature OF ave
nue. IN which he severely report which
the plaintir made, and which he praised The Ora
hamito pay ement out OF his district The defence Is
that the allegations the letter true,
anu that u was a privileged communication.
Anna h. Wardrop some time ago brought suit IN
tho superior Court, which was tried before Judge
Spcir special Term, to set aside certain deed exc
cutcd by the plant before her murragc, dated NUv-
cmbcr z0 1867, conveying certain real estate III this
city 10 Wnhclminia " Conner n so 10 set aside two
deeds subsequently, given by Mrs Conner william $.
Yard and by Yard 10 tue defendant Howell The con-
trovcrsy relates 10 the validity OF The deed nrst de-
scribcd and the ISSUE lies between the plaintiff aDd
defendant, Bcnoni II. Howell, daughter and lathcr.
Tue deeds were gwen without consideration, ana hence
the clam OF their ilcsahty. Judge Sper yesterday
gave judgment for the plantn AS against Bcnoul II.
! Howell.
When the new boulevard was opened Mr. Van
Raden applied Tor damages 10 the assessors he being
a property owner. They refused, ana he got u per-
emptory mandamus The argued before
Judge Bray Ia supreme Court, Chambers, yesterday
n motion to punish the assessors Tor contempt In
disobcying the order. They made return that they
were unable 10 obey tho order; that there were two
claimants and they could not tell which tho owner
OF the property. II claimcd that THIS was
ovasivc. Judge Lawrence said nc old not consider II