Daily Republican., 1880-05-18
TEE COURTS.

A New Trial Wanted for Cassidy
Going over the Trial Ltst-Pre
Iiminsry Discussion on sh'
CFORsdaIo Libel suif.
Specially reported for the REPUBLICAN,.
New Castle, May II.
AFTERNOON sRssIoN.
The court convened again prompt
lily at 3 O'Clock, when Mr.. Lore couIssl
for Edward Cassidy convicted Of as
sault with intent To kill John N. Legl
Sergeant Of police, moved for . new
trial and was given until to morrow X
file his reasons.
The Court again commenced goine
over the list Of cases marked for trial
but none being ready on account o.
some material witness or other causes,
NO jury was empanneled and at 4
o'clock the jurymen were discharged
until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.
After the trial lists had been properly
slimated the following were left mark
ed upon the docket for trial or to be
disposed in some other manner.
No. 8. State use Of Jesse Sharp's ad-
ministrator vs.. Robert L. Armstrong
Debt. Spruance- Hoffecker.
No. II. James Pollock Il Son VS.. John
Mcbride. Case. MeCaulley-L Lore.
No. q, J. * +. Greenwalt vs.. Herman
Boil. Capias case. O'Byrne-Lore.
No. 81. Washington Barron vs. Rich
ard Clayton. Case. Rodney.Valla
digham.
No. So. Joseph Browns adminstra,
tion VS.. Anthony Reybold. Case. Rod
ney- Polk.
No. 5s. Bnoch Moore, Jr., vs.. Mary
Quinby. Case. Turner. Lore.
No. GA. William 7. Croasdale VS..
VIM. Bright. Case. Bird-Lore.
No. 65. Same vs.. DR.. J. R. Tantum,
Case. Bird. Lore.
No. 81. Same vs.. D. T. Hawkins.
Case. Bird-Lore.
No. 6S, against Bright, Tantum, ct
al, collectively, was passed.
No. 100. Charles Sailer VS.. William
Butler. Case. Harrington Massey.
No. 100. Hunter Il brennan vs..
Bsyard E. Derrickson. Case, Bates
Lore.
No. 13.. George T. Ball vs.. Isaac
Grubb. Case. Booth Rodney.
No. 1888. Shannon's executors vs..
Richard NJ. Griffith and Philip Tray
nor. Case. Rodney-Turner.
No. 143. Seymour Preston vs.. David
o. Gillespie. Case. Nields Lore.
No. 144. Thomas c. Morris vs. Isaac
Grubb. Case. Lore Rodney.
No. l45. Stephen s. Southsrd vs.
George Thorn and wife. Sol ia. sur
Mortg. Bird. Higgins.
No. $50. Charles C. Agness VS.. W..
H. Matf's executors. Case. Bird Du'
Pont.
No. l52. Delaware State Fire Marine
Insurance Co.. VS.. W. T. Croasdale.
Case, and No. 1853, same vs.. "Every
Evening" Publishing Co. Lore-Bird
Bates. A special jury is to be drawn
In these cases.
No. ITO. Hugh F. Scarborough VS..
VIM. McClelland, Jr. Foreign attach
ment. Case. Gray.
No. $50. George W. Ortlip vs. Caleb
C. Hood and Evans Pennington, bailiff.
Replevin. Harmsn-Nields.
No. 100. Edward Mulligan vs.. John
Dunn. Case. Lore. Harman and Bird.
No. 207. John Bsnge vs.. William
Benge. Case. Vallandigham-M -Maris.
No. 2os. George DOugherty, Jr., VS..
George Dougherty's admir-. Case.
sharpley.Lore.
No. 2l2. Eagle & Bro, vs.. VIM. L.
Sparks. Case. Rodney-C Cooper.
No. 2l3. VIM. =. Johnson, p. b. a.
VS.. John Boyle, d.b.a. Appeal. Booth
Rodney.
No. 237. Joseph Brewers adm'rs.
vs.. George Brewer. Foreign attach
ment, debt. Rodney.
No. $50. Jones, Hoar 4 Co., VS.. Is
rael Gurksl. For Att. Case. Cooper.
No. $40. Reeves, Parvin & Co., We.
Margaret MoClelland and William Nc
Clelland. For Att. Case.
No. 234. L. Il. Lee and Bro, vs.,
Noble P. Ferguson. For Att. case.
Rodney.
No. 245. J. &. Tygert & Co., VS.. VIM.
J. Aarants. For Att. case. Lore.
In the case against the Bellevue
Quarry Co., judgments were rendered
in favor of the defendants for costs.
A preliminary discussion ensued in
tie Croasdals libel suits Mr.. Bird
counsel for plaintiff asking leave to
file certain pleas. Messrs. Lore AID
Whiteley counsel for the officers Of the
Company objected in the
ground that II these pleas were allowed
Il would materially change the aspect
pf the cases. They also agreed that
the plaintiff should have filed these
pleas earlier in the case. Leave was
granted by the Court to file the pleas.
Mr.. Bates one of the Counsel for |
plaintiff asked leave Of the court TO in
troduce certain interrogations in rela-
tion to the character Of James H. Myers,
Secretary Of the Delaware s. F. & NJ.
Insurance Compeny. Mr.. Bates offered
to prove that James II. Myers was a
professional organizer Of fraudulent in
surance companies. Messrs. Lore and
Whiteley objected tosthe interrogstories
On the ground that the character Of Mr..
Myers was irrelevant and had nothing
to do with the way in which the Com.
pany was carried on.
The court sustained the objections
taking occasion to say that all the Off
GERS Of the company might be guilty
indiviau ally of fraud and yet conduct
the business Of the company in per-
fectly honest and legitimate manner.
However II the interrogatives were
necessary TO prove the allegations they
would be admitted.
Iho intarrnnat tnries ara 10 ha aent to |