Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1877-09-20
CIRCUIT COURT.

to all who had business in the Court. True,
there was not an unusual amount Of business
despatched, but this is attributable to the
fact that the points involved in every case
were stubbornly contested by opposing coun.
sci, and much time was necessarily consumed
in the examination of witnesses. Suitors and
counsel, generally, SO far as we have heard
an expression Of opinion, are satisfied with
the equitable, impartial aud unbiased rulings
and opinions of the Court. There was not
an exception taken by counsel to single
ruling of his Honor, and on the civil side Of
the docket but one appeal made for new
trial, which appeal was refused.
The following are the leading causes dis
posed of in addition to those reported in our
issue of last week: ....
Richard Sadler us. Tilman R. Gaines and Julius
Mills Gaines, as the palmetto immigration So
ciety" received from Sadler, through Mills, $50,
fees, &C., for furnishing four German emigrants.
The emigrants were never received. Mills lia-
bilty consisted in paying over the whole $So to
Gaines in breach Of the agreement between him
self and Sadler, that only one-haf should be paid
the other half to be reserved until the arrival OF
the emigrants. Judgment against Gaines, $l99: 80,
and against Mills, $44.99. Messrs. Hart Il Hart
for plaintiff; Messrs. Patterson and CASTOR for
defendants. +
jeremiah Moss u.s. J E. Leech. This was an
which the plaintiff claimed to have over the de-
fendant's land and for damages for its obstruction.
The defendant pleaded that he did not know the
plaintiffs road, as the grant under which plantin
several old roads over defendants land that he
had left new road open, as good as the old one
which he had closed up; that the plaintiff was q
bankrupt and had no right OF action. HIS Honor
charged the jury that plaintiff was entltea &C.,; 70
fled his road. Verdict for defendant. Mr.. spen-
Ger for plaintiff; Mr.. Bell for defendant.
Jeremiah Moss us. j. E. Leech and w. b.
Leech. This was an action for damages for
trespass charged as having been committed by
defendants on plaintiffs mill-yard by cutting off
a strip thereof The land belonged to one OF the
defendants. The plaintiff claimed that the YARD
had been staked off by metes and bounds. Inc
defendants pleaded that they had left plaintiff
good and sufficient mil-yard, and, therefore, he
was not damaged that plaintiff was bankrupt
and had no right Of action. His Honor charged
the Jury that If they believed the mill.yard had
been staked off to plaintiff, as claimed, ne was
entitled to verdict; If not, the deienaants saola
have verdict. as it AZ rpeared the mill yard was
still sufficient in size Verdict for defendants'
Same counsel as in case above
Lucinda Bennetfus. G. P. Bennett. This was
action 10 recover u traCC Ol Idtlus 1Ho Sooi1
instructed the jury to find simply verdict as to
who was entitled to the possession Of the land
the equities reserved. The jury found for the
defendant. His Honor then passed an order that
Mrs. Bennett was entitled to Communication for
her support from February l, 1872 to the present
time; to a support for the remainder OF her life;
that the land be liable therefor, and the plaintiff
enioined from disposing of or alternating the land
the meanwhile. Messrs. Wilson q Wilson for
plaintiff; Mr.. Bell and Messrs. Hart & Hart, for
defendant.
Mauney Bros. & Roberts vs. Robert Barber.
Cause of action, note Verdict for plaintiff Mr..
Chambers for plaintiff; Mr.. Bell for defendant.
s. A. McElwee vs. Catherine Alcorn. Cause Of
action, note, Verdict for defendant. Messrs.
Hart & Hart for plaintiff; Mr.. Beatty for de-
fendant.
John J. Mcclure, administrators of 9. W. Mel
ton, deceased, us. w. M. Walker. This action
was brought by Melton in his life time, demai'd-