National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1878-02-13
Supreme Court of the United states.


and by Mr. =. n. Bangs for appellee, and concluded
| by Mr.. \. 8. Van Wrinkle for appellant
No. 10. John llinn, appellant, VS.. August ober
man. submitted by Mr.. George L. Chaplin for ap
pE T." e oS G. and SsSapy Martin &c. pialnl in
error rs. James Marks. Submitted by Mr.. T. J. Du.
mnt and Mr, {. W. IInrnor for defendants In error.
Hugh Campbell. Argued by Mr.. john W. Okey
and Mr.. William NJ Cory for plaintiff IN error.
Court declined to hcor argument oil behalf OF de-
:cndant IN error.
Adjourned until to. morrow at twelve o'clock.
CIRCUIT CoURT-cnIFr JUSTICE CARTTER.
Frazier VS. District Of Columbia; verdict for
plaintiff for 100 damages. Grimes We. District OF
Columbia; Judgment by default for slj9oJ. Rowe
vs.. Smith Judgment below affirmed, Hcnning VS..
smith jury out Sdtcr ct al. ". Walter ct al; on
hearing,
PROBATE CoURT-REaIsTER wEBgTER.
| IN ~ estate Of Lansing Nandorcn deceased APP
plCailOu for Letters Of administration by W. Van.
durpn, jr., fled and order Of publication made In
rc estate Of Charles A. Laub deceased order grant.
ing leave 10 sell certain property. Last Will OF
Thomas jackson wa: admitted 70 probate, and Yin.
executors bond 81 Obn Last will fCharlcs Thomas,
late Ofthc United States army, deceased: admitted
| to probate aud Tie exccuuiS gave bond In s3N0J
Last will and testament OF Rev. John NJ. Green, de-
| ceased, ADMITTED To probate aud record; Mrs.
J Green qualified as cXecUtriN; bond S,Wn Last
/ will aud cOdlril OF George A. nayley admitted To
probate d. H. BGrtol renowned his right rs eS'
ccutor,, and letters, with viii annexed; were
| granted u Jlilu BAllcys NIrsClh' DOnl w olO!bb
IN re estate of Jahe1 fIarl,,w deceased late Of St
| Louis letter. OF administration granted to Charles
| u, Gilman bond 500. Mrs cItac OF Mary \. d.
and Richard rctit, DECEASED rule isS,ird On exc
cuton; The will of Dennis. Magru,lcr, coorcd.
was MED; r. ~ orphans e. EdwGri Bouligny
| certificates from the Land Oaicc.
EQUITY CoURr-JUsTfCE wYLIE.
| Riggs & Co. Us. DOugasS ct al. Demurrer over
rulcd. with leave To answer aud Judgment creditors
! To appear. Injunction granted against Marshal
Douglass from selling property.
| CRIMINAL CouRT-JUsrICE wYLIE.
Charles T. Davis was placed on trial on the
charge Of asSaultng Lieutenant Il. L.. lIoSie, Dis
trrt Engineer. This case was heard ia the Police
Court IN connection with that OF kyrum A. Murphy
who plead guilty last Monday previous and was
fined so and costs. 1t came up on appeal. The
jury found him guilty. aud motion for new trial
was entered, argued. nnd denied: The court inn
used fine OF 50 and costs aud thirty days In jail
Ills Honor said that MIR. Murphy had been permit
ted to plead guilty, but II he had known the cir;
cumstinCcs and the jury should have convicted
him, the court would have given him six months
in jail. "A Murphy had failed to pay the hne
| cupGIs was issued.
Frank Brown alias james Cabin was convicted
Of picking the pocket Of Mary D. Lambie, and sent
to the penicntiury for three years.
Noah Hamilton WIS found gity OF petit LARGE
ny, and this beng the second u!fense he was sell
fenced to the pcnittntiary Tor two years.
Maurice Donohue was put on trial on the charge
of burglary and hrc my. aud convicted. The
Court gave MIN thrc1 yctrs III the batlmore Peni'
tentiary. motion tpr a new trial was entered.
SUPREME COURT OF THE DISTRICT.
Phoenix Mutual Life Insurance Company
VS.. A. Grant Justice DIN delivered the opinion OF
the Court discharging the receiver and restoring
which embraces iots J. \, So o. 10 H. II, and H.
squar. 100 also that the receiver pay into the reg
istry OF the:court all rents collected from said lois
and not paid out; also all bills of rents accrued
from said lots; that he state true account of all
receipts and disbursements made by him, together
with all Outlays for expenses.
, tThe Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Company
. V. Hugh L. Gaaher ct al. In tho month of March
! 1873, the complainant exhibited Its bill in court
! praying all Injunction against the defendants, u
restrain them from cxcuvnting beneath the line o
. the 'Tiber Creek sewer" unless proper support,
aud projections should be constructed By The de
Z PENDANTS.
derives It's iranchse from various legislative acts
: IN the 9th day Of February, 1871 an act OF Con
II grcss became law, authorizing the Baltimore and
/. Potomac Railroad Company to extend into aud
e within the limits of the District OF Columbia q
u lateral brunch of It's main Inc Of railroad which
'r that company was then about To locate and con
l. strct from the city Of Baltimore to the Potomac
river. said act authorized The company 70 exer
and subjected L to the sane Tcsrrctons, in
G the extension n'rl construction OF the said
4 lateral branch railroad, as II was authorized
= by the intent Of its charter or act Of in
=. corporation, in the extension aud construction O.
r any ru!Oad y Thin the state Of Maryland. Tn,
act also provides that tho company shG! he cnti
= tied to the same rights, Compensation benefits ent
Il immuutlcs In the Of It's said railroad and IL
regard thereto US are provided in it, said charter
vSced the RI 1T 10 construct any other lateral rue,
II OF roads within the said District than the sai'
lateral branch or road By said act authorized.
rs On or about september - 1871, the late Board o
:, Public Works Of this district entered into con
a. tract with the defendants To CxCGNutu for. build
/ and complete the continuation Of the liber Creel
sewer one Ufthc conditions being that all Losses 0
damages arising out Of the nature at the work TO
done arising from any unforeseen obstruction u
difficulties III the prosecution Of the same shOu'
10 DC sustained by the contractors.
10 The sewer In question passes under the Trucks o
| the complainant where tnty cross SCUM tuplU
II street and, IN order to complete ths said improve
4 incnl y was neer,satS 70 nnSs afge eN,a ~
ii cNpcn>e, would have endangered the transit o
As trains and the transportation OF freight and ras
IL sTuCt temporary SUPPORTS Tor the tracks along Au
over the excavation, and also 10 construct archie
70 To sustain the trGCks permanently after the scwc
should have been Completed dispute arose bt
al tween the parties touching the burden Of the eS
T. pcIlse Necessary 10 make these temporary and pei
al nlanent supports. lhcrupon the bill was hled +
- the complainant, anu temporary injunction OF
r. tanned. The court, by is order passed on the III
Il day OF March, 1875, directed the con
n tractors TO construct that portion Of the scwc
:. Under The supervision and and direction
Il furnish the temporary supports Tor the tracks dun
ing the construction Of tile sewer, under the sipeI
H. vision OF the engineer IN such manner as not I
s. interfere with Obstrct the transit Of trains du
II. ing tho construction Of the same, and IN such
s. manner as to provide safe transit Tor the train
amer the completion Of the said sewer. 1t was als
directed that the contractors should keep an acct
rate account Of the cost Of constructing and muiT
tnnimg the temporary supports while the sal
r. sewer was being constructed and Of the additions
a. cost Of the beneath the said tracks neCcssar
lie to render the safe and proper for the ran'it
, the trains amer its completion. The question rs
VI the liability Tor the cost of the temporary support
IL Of the tracks and the additional cost Of the scwC
nj required To render the tracks safe aud proper IL
" the future transit Otlht trains OF the company MITE
r. the completion Of the Improvement was reserve
f. for future dCtCrmHGt pll. AHCrWArd the cause WI
- ruieI red Ia the HuilIr Of the court 10 dvtrImi
r. the umuuut of the EXPENSES for tho said work PR
vidcd Tor by the order mentioned The auditor /,
ported the Uu-t " he SlE II.
The CHu,c AncR ards tumG on for final henrini
Il, and II decree was made by the court Oh the 81
40 day OF April, >77. udjUlgmg that no part Of tn
III cot Of constructing such temporary or pc
70 Muuuut SUPPORTS OF the tracks made nCCe>sHr
~ by the building Of the sewer Was properly charge
@. able to the, complainant aud that neither Of Tn
r.. defendants, the contractors nor the District OF &,
10 lumfu had any claim against the Culnplnlnnn
for such expense From that decree an uppCi
was taken by the contractors and by the District {
~ Columbia.
a. The question arising In tho case for determine
4 ton l. this: l. the Iai.TOad company bound
the erection Of Temporary and permanent support
and arches necessary 10 sustain the tracks whcr
rs they puss over tho excavations made for III
10 sewer!
-l The company contends that no part thereof ca
in ITuprrly ht rhaTgCubic to IT,
IA Argued 10y Mr. TOttCn, for the company, and l.
- Mr.. Riddle lur the defendants. and submitted
u Ady"uruOd until Monday next.