The daily gazette., 1880-05-19
FIFTH EDITION.
THE COUNTY COURTS.
WHAT WAS DONE AT THIS
MORNINGS SESSION.
INDICATIONS OF ANOTHER DULL DAY
-BARBERoUs wIrNEssEs-A JURY
TRIAL sTARTED UPON.
Specially reported for the GAZETTE.
New CASTLE, May 10, 1880.

Specially reported for the GAZETTE.
New CASTLE, May 10, 1880.
Court opened al 10 O'Clock, this morn
ing, Chief Justice COmegys and Judge
Houston on the ben'h.
In regard TO the recent Sherifi's sale
OF the propery Of Benz. q. Wells and
wife, Of Wilmington, wm =. Spruance,
Esq, presented atiidavits from Mr. Weils
and wife. stating that they had received
no notice Of the suit on which Judgment
was obtained, at The November Term,
aud asked for rule to show cause VIII,
the proc, edligs shcu d not be reversed
and the sale set aside. The Iul. was
made rel urnable Oh Saturday.
Case No. Al On the trial list, Warren
p. Kennedy VS.. Wm. A. Woodrow, was
called, but II was found that most of
the with, sses were in the barber shop,
across the street, getting shaved. Tie
witnesses were mainly from Ne@a'k,
and among them was the only barber
OF tie town, who was the first To SAT-
Tor Court. This compelled the other
to proceed TO New Castle with unshoru
faces, aud get there barbering done
here.
The trial list was then gone over, and
several cases passed by without positiv.
announcement on Monday. were coll
timed or announced In process If set
tlement.
The case of Andrew Hance, assignee.
vs, Benz. F. Wells and wife, was an
nounced as having been referred to
Henry G. Banning, Mahlon M. Child
and Thos. w. McClary referees. This
is an action on mortgage.
Among the cases ON trial for this
term were the suits against the Belle
vue Quarry Company, by number Of
employees for wages due. The cases
were thirty in number. and all were
settled by an agreement for judg-
ment in favor of the Quarry Company
for costs.
A jury was then drawn to try the
case of Warren Z. Kennedy, VS. VIM.
A. Woodrow. j. l.. Vallandigham
and j. X. Booth, Esqs, for plaintiff,
and VIM. c. Spruance, Esq, for de-
fendant.
This is an action of slander, the
plaintiff claiming that the defense ac-
cused him Of stealing. The circum-
stances as detailed by the plaintiffs s
counsel are, briefly stated, as follows /:
On June 9Th, 1877 Wm. A. Woodrow
of Newark went into the store Gf VIM.
Murray to pay a small amout ana ten
dered $40 note in payment which Vim.
Murray could not change. Woodrow
went to the store o. Ed ward McPike and
got the note changed into two five dollar
bills but on returning to Musray's store
he placed his hand In his vest pocket and
announced that. he had lost one of the
five dollar bills He then procured
light from MIR. Murray ami searched up
ard down the street for half an hour but
without success. Then, returning to the
store lie deliberately accused Kennedy of
picking up the note Kennedy Indignantly
denied the the charge and offered TO
submit to be searched but Woodrow re-
fused to do this, aud repeated the charge
saying he could swear to IL. Six months
later Kennedy heard that Woodrow was
repeating the charge and then he brought
the suit for slander,
Josiah Murray, the first witness.
testified to the circumstances of the
case substantially as related by the
counsel for the plaintiff, and to hear
ing Woodrow say he believed Ken.
nedy picked up the money, and after
wards making the charge directly to
Kennedy.
The witness was put through
dreary cross examination by the de-
fense, in which he was compelled to
relate all the circumstances of the
case with the minutest details, almost
down to minutes and seconds, feet and
inches, the state of the weather, and
whether or not the wind was blowing
at the time, witness being of the
opinion that the wind was blowing
quite breeze" at the time The note
was being searched for. One part OF
witness testimony was that when
Woodrow accused Kennedy of taking
the note Kennedy replied, "You are a |
God id liar"
Alfred Bailey testified to seeing |
Woodro" come in'o Murray's store, |
come out again in a few minutes, and |
aiterward return, saying he had lost |
five dollars; also, after The search, to |
hearing Woodrow say to Kennedy, |
ouye got the money, | saw you
pick it up" This witness was slight |
ly deaf, and the ques ions of counsel
at times bothered him considerably
He was also put through a vigorous
cross-examination by Mr.. Spruance,
and in relation TO the weather said it |
was still night, with not very much
wind.
Ferris Rudolph corroborated the evil
dence OF the previous witness ia regard
10 the search tor the lost note, and said
Woodrow SAID to Kennedy, "Warren,
saw you stoop and pick that money up
with your leit hand, and will swear t.
IT," This WAS in the store, aud wnn,ss
went in and said to Woodrow, "Ken
nedy could not have p cked up the note,
or l was on the porch and did not see
aim oOp." Woodrow resp ded, "You
lont know any thing about il, you we're
rot there" This witness was also put
through rigid cr' ss-examination In re-
aion TO The de, ails Of the transaction.
James Ii. Ray was called 10 the slaud
estlfied merely TO the f,cL that the
plaintiff was resident of Newark.
WIN. A. Wood~ ard, Of Wilmington,
vas called and testified that in June OF
'uly, 1878, he went to Newark, and had
conversation with Woodrow in rela-
ION 20 this cae, when Woodrow spoke
o him in relation to Kennedy and other
'artles IN relation to a criminal matter,
'ut the details OF the conversation were
objected to by the defence OIL the ground