The daily gazette., 1879-12-06
FIRST EDITION.
OUR COUNTY COURTS.

STILL THE EJECTMENT cAsE-ANoTu-
ER DAY OF ARGUMENT-MR. sPRU-
ANcE EXPLAINS A SAD NEWSPAPER
GRIEVANCE TO THE EJURY-THEL LONG
SUIT TO END TODAY.
Specially reported for the Gazette.
NEW CASTLE, Dec. 5.--In Court this
forenoon Mr.. Cummins continued his
argument In the ejectment case, and
spoke with marked force In favor If his
client. He alluded particularly to re-
marks which Mr.. Spruance had made TO
the Court on the previous day In refer
epce TO a general verdict. A general
verdict of guilty Of occup,i ing this land,
not one inch Of which the plaintiffs had
proved they owned, could be brough in
according TO this statement. And this
showed the desperate length to which
this railroad company was prepared to
60; they wanted to get general verdict
that did not show how much land had
been taken, and then TO 60 on the prop
erty of the defendants, and, after taking
all they desired, to fight the defendants
resistance of the trespass. He could see
no cause that the jury possibly could have
to bring In such verdict, and all the
proof was in favor of bis side.
MIR. Cummins concluded at 1888 AMI
recess till o'clock was taken.
When Court rea sembled at three
o'clock Mr.. Spruance commenced the
closing argument for the plaintiffs. He
addressed the jury for short time upon
the main issues of the case, and spoke
briefly to the Court upon the authorities
which Mr.. Cummns had previously cited
in reference to disabilities connected
with adverse possession cases. The
principal cases cited referred TO statutory
disabilities in other States and did not
affect this case.
Resuming his argument to the jury,
Mr.. Spruance, after few minutes de-
voted TO the case in general, relieved the
monotory of his speech with an allusion
made by the representative of the GA
zErTE, who has been reporting Court, in
Wednesdays paper. Mr.. Spruance said:
81 find that one Of the papers says that
inny cross examination Of MIR. Enoch
Moore | said that could not furnish
him with brains to understand my ques-
ton. Now then there are some news
paper people who think that Court pro-
ceedings, like dog fights, are intended
for the amusement of their readers, and
so report them, and regard the former as
much matter of that kind as the latter.
desire to say to the jury that this is
false, and that / did not treat Mr.. Moore
with any discourtesy, and II would be
unseemly for me to say anything disre-
spectful of such an intelligent witness,
who is much older man than myself.
On this point will say that / never
knew case of this kind conducted SO
amicably as has this one been."
The learned counsel for the plaintiffs
from this point took up the testimony of
Charles ard Enoch Moore, and in his re-
view and criticism of it drew the conclu-
sion that, while both were truthful and
respectable men, he was not willing to
implicitly rely upon the recollections OF
the appearance of the land in dispute, al
most in their infancy, and he would de-
duct far different inference from what
they said from that which the defense
drew. He described a dock as a distinct
excavation in the land, back from larger
body of water, having confined limits
, Al d artificlal barriers, and argued that
IL would be sheer nonsense to identity
such a thing with that described by the
Messrs. Moore as Vests dock. A dock
|
, testimony of these two gentlemen show
ed that when they were In their boy
hood nearly all the fast land that is south
of w ater street and between Market
and the filing up on Orange street was
| waste of waters. And this they called
Vests dock, but such name was an
I absurdity, and the defense, instead ol
showing where the old dock was hac
B made jts existence more Of an absurdity
|
review the testimony until O'Clock
when court adjourned until O'Clock to
morrow morning, at which time the ar
Q | vnment will be concluded, and tht
o Chief Justice expects to charge the jnr.
l., in time to take the noon train fer home
8 COURT NOTES.
The remarks of Mr.. Spruauce durinl
his argument, with regard to the GA
ZErTE's statement about his reioinde
to Mr.. Enoch M oore. we're calculated Il
= reflect upon the reporter and a wore
a about the matter maypot be out OF place
a Mr.. Spruance has depied that he use'
q tho words and his denial Is now pup
= = hsbed Just as fully (he being authorlt.
II for it) and with as much willingness a
thorgh he had como to the reporter In
" gentiemanly way and stated that
o wrong Interpretation had been place.
= upon his remark, instead of saying hare
things behind the reporters back an
then denouncing tbei thing In the hea
of debate In open court. 1t now appear
that MT. Spruance is alleged to hay
"a said that he directed the remark to MI
n Cummins and not to Mr.. Moore, but an
o way. Mr.. Enoch Nj oore, Jr., understoo
= il as the reporter did and directly wen
. to Mr.. Spruance to demand a retractio
- for aQross nsutoffertd d to his aged fathe
a and It is said to have been well for ths
y gentleman that he hurrieily explaine
Il 10 Mr. Moore. The sarcastic thrust, ,ths
If newspaper people identify dog hghl
with court proceediDgs,is manifestly III
lust but the question arises If counsellor
win persist in interspersing court pre-
ceedings with dog fights, Hgurativel
!. sueaking, "what are you going to
e. about it?" =.
q This eiectment case will 60 to the jur
~ to-morrow, and the way will be clei
',s for the Rowe Dugan murder case
4 Monday. d..
IN business yet TO be tried, 1t is likely ths
" " the term will be spun well along toward
I" the holiday SHOWS.