National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1879-12-18


The suit of the rlnh Baptist church. OF South
Washington, against the Baltimore IL Potomac
Railroad Company came on for hearing before the
court In general term Chict-Justicc Cartier and
Justices Haguer and unexpectedly. Messrs. x.
I. Mcrrick and J. j. Darlington appeared for the
complainant and Colonel Enoch Totten for the de-
PENDANT
The plaintiff became incorporated May 5, 1870.
and subsequently possessed of lot situated on ID,
between FOur.aiid-a-half and Sixth streets south
west, on which was nnorward erected the Flth
Baptist church. to be used for public religious wor
ship Tho suit brought by the trustees of the church
complains that on April l, 1874, the railroad
pany built an engine house and machine shops
contiguous TO the mceinghOuse and since that
time have continued to do injury to the church
The maohine shops are kcptrunning. creating loud
noises, the locomotives pass In and ont of the yard
across tho sidewalk Into the street and on to the
main stem Of the road, stopping, when the engineer
was 30 disposed, on the foot way, and thereby
blocking travel These engines blew OF steam
sounded their whistles, and the drivers rang bells
on the Sabbath aud other days, intCrrupting wOr-
ship and religious meetings held In the church. IL
was also charged that the smoke from the chin
neys OF the roundh house blew into the church win.
dOws whenever the latter were open, making the
auditorium OF the edifce disagreoablo and creating
nuisance.
By the continuance of this state Of affairs 1t Is al.
legged that the church has been losing It's congrega
ton, and $4,000 was claimed rs accommodation for
the damages done.
The first hearing was before Justice Cox In the
Circuit court, and the jury disagreed.
second trial took p,nce before Justice Wylic.
aud the jury returned verdict for the plaintiff for
The defendants excepted to the rulings of the
court. and the hearing is now upon them and a
motion for q new trial.
The Boldest Attempt at Divorce.
on November 8. 1873. Catharine Creader. by per-
mission of Justice Humphreys, was permitted with
out dcpositng In the clerks Office the customary
ice, 10 NE petition for divorce from her husband,
john {. Crcadcr, OH the ground of descrtion. The
docket fails to show that solicitor was retained
on either side subpoena to answer was issued
TO the defendant, which was returned by the mar
sinai gDTUary u. $50 mot fDIlu1.' An order of
publication was made April II, 1870, and subse-
quenuy evidence furnished TINT the order hnd
Teen complied with on the LIST Of March of the
same year one month and half prior to the grant.
ing of the order for publication. Tho taking OF
testimony was begun before Examiner J. j. John
son. only one witness, John i}rluson, was brought
before him and examined.
He testified that he had known the petitioner
for thirteen years and the defendant slightly The
parties to this suit lived together es man aud wife
and to the best of his knowledge were recognized
as such. lie knew that the defendant had aban-
doncd and deserted her but could not fix the
date exactly. He knew 1t had been between len
ana eleven years ago. lie had opportunities for
| knowing whether or not hc sent her money, and
was very well satisfied t.Iut he had not rendered
| her any support since lie left her. This was the
| only witness examined, and upon this evidence
| the cause was submitted.
Justice Macarthur yesterday delivered tho fol.
| lowing opinion IN the case:
| This is petition for divorce oil the ground OF
| williul desertiOn. This is the bodcst attempt at
| divorce made ensy that has ever fallen under my
observation. There Is no appearance Of solicitor
ior either party no one appears res pons!6lc for the
cause. There Is but one deposition ana that occll-
pies only one side ofa sheet Of paper, and is quite
unsatisfactory. II does not appear whore the al
Ssfd dGs Sr tGoG PGGS or .9% long the com
| ference. 10 allow divorce on such q meAgT,
| record would be mockery. The bill must be dis
| missed"
What the Grand Jury Found,
The Grand Jury yesterday presented indictment
against the following parties: Charles Beavers
alias Charles Keithley larceny; Theodore Handy