Daily Republican., 1879-05-28
FIRST EDITION.
ORR COUNTY COURT.

FIRST EDITION.
OUR COUNTY COURT.
.rre Of the Court I'm the Magari.
Cnse-The nOilis.-vandegrit
sac Resumed--A Verdict In
avor of " tlmingtsn and Against
agarity.
Icial Correspondence OF the Republican.
NEw CASTLE, May, u '79
I 8 O'Clock, p. m. whom the court
Judge Comegys proceeded to
liver his charge to the jury in the
s of P. Magarity W. the City Of Will
bgton. He first showed the powers
corporation, like the City of Will
hgton, to improve the city, lay out
eets, curb them, pave them, make
tters and sewers, and to do all that
scessary to improve and protect
bpsrty under certain provisions and
kulations, without encroaching upon
rights Of the people to the damage
their property without compensa-
IN.
The oticers Of q city had merely min
erisl not judicial power, and were not
ponsible for the damages in the min
rial performance of the functions OF
Sir offices. He then charged plainly
IL the jury could assess for no dam
ss except what had bseu estimated
"a proven by the witnesses in the
"a: that the jury could assess no dam
kss unless they occurred within three
Years before entering the suit that the
sityiwas not liable for any damages that
he1 occurred though an overflow OF
Iratsr. On this the Judge was emphat-
and specifically enjoinsd the jury
t to take such damages into consider
On.
He 9, arged that the only thing that
jury had right to consider was,
damages that had occurred to the
perry Of Mr.. Magarity, by the leak
of water from the sewer, within
lee years before the entelins OF this
h. The Jury then retired to their
ms and the case of George H. Hollis
ainst Isaac W. Vandegrift was re-
med.
This case is a very intricate one and
tolved the decision Of some very tine
ints of law which engaged the atten-
n of the court the most OF the after
pn. -,
lhe action was brought by Mr.. Hollis
ainst Isaac Ward Vandegrift an en-
rser on TWO notes each for $1,000, be-
tic principal. The notes wera
ned by John A. Vandegrift as the
incipal, and were also endorsed by
pnard &. Vandegrift. John A. Van
Rrift was carrying on business il
isfield, in company with some otheI
rsons, and coming up to Middletowl
had these notes drawn in his favor
ID endorsed as already stated, excep
at the note was signed John A. Van
grit & Co. =.
Frank vandegrift was the first wit
es on the stand. He testified that he
IS a son of Leonard G. Vandegrift, ,an'
brother of John A. vandegrift; tha
and his brother about the first
nuary 1877 went to his uncle's p.ac
get bis uncle Isaac W. Vandegrift t
N the notes that his uncle objects
y doing so as long as it was signed B.
Cohn A. Vandegrift Il Co., because Ii
would like to know who the Co. wa,
but being assured that it would bs al
right he signed it and then John A
Vandegritt left to return to Crlshel
With the notes in his possession.
Peter w. Vincent being the next vii
ness called, testified that he lived
Erisiie.d and was present when John 4
andegrift delivered the notes to M
Bills, but that the "& Co.," was eros
d out and the words "or order" wei
erpolated in another place in til
pte. Mr.. Vincent was about to d
Y HI the conversation that took place
l. delivery of the note when he vi
ecked by Mr.. Lore, counsel for the d
bee, on the ground that evidence bin
& other parties whose names we're u
the note was not admissible.
"A long discussion ensued, in whi'
essrs. Higgins and Moore contsnd'
at the evidence was admissible.
harp colloquy was for some time carl
on between the counsel named al
IL Court, all three of the Judges ia
lg a part in it. Numerous law boo
ere produced from numerous gre
lgs, and numerous quotations we
ade from numerous authors, tn
\ bally Mr.. Vincent was allowed to tt
bg he recoliected the alterations
10 notes. Mr.. Vincent said it "
hpressed upon his mind by Mr.. Hol
yiDg, "why did you not leave t
ptes as they were originality N
pore then dismissed Mr.. Vincent, wi
le remark, "you know a great az
pre- but you are not allowed to tell
which Mr.. Vincent replied affirm
N Fey.
NJ j. B. Naudain being called testlll
drawing two $1,000 bonds afterwar
gned by the same parties. The
bnds it seems we're to take the plt
y the notes, but Mr.. Hollis discoV'
g that lie could recover on the not
lclined accepting the bonds.
At 6 o'clock the court adjourn'
# 10 case to be resumed in the mo-
|!3 g.
A few minutes after 6 o'clock I
lry in the case of P. Magarity agar
10 city of Wilmington, in which
aimed $4,000 dam ages for an overfl
water, came into court and rendel
verdict in favor of the city.
A Solid Paper.
PHILADELPHIA, May n, '79.
EDITORS OF DAILY REPUBLICAN,
WILMINGTON, DEL,
Dear .Sirs:-Please send me at
ice your daily REPUBLICAN. A pa
solid as yours | must have.
md van IN oI n arf icamant. II AM