Delaware state journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1870-1883, 1881-05-26

and those who snbcnntrart with him. We
think Murine comes within that sub class,
who can file Their claims within the 10 days.
This statute WIS made in order 10 allow the
mechanics and sueh like employers to obtain
their liens on the building before the CON
tractor for erecting it could come in and cover
1t with his claims. We think, therefore, that
the action was not piematurey brought.
The second ground upon which the de
PENDANTS counsel claims u verdict il because
there is no proof that Murine delivered the
stone Mt New Castle on the credit OF the
building. While it Ii true there IL no direct
proof to this effect we think there il evidence
of this which ynn mnSt cDtsider. If you find
that the llintiif did deliver them ON the
credit of the building then he is entitled 10
recover otherwise not.
The jury withdrew at 5.l5 o'clock
The other jllryInen were discharged from
attendance until Monday at 10 o'clock.
u. q. bradford, Jr,, Esd asked for and
obtained Judgment for the plaintiff 10y de-
fanli i'll Toy Vi. Collins.
The jury iii the hlulrine-Perkins case came
down at930 last night with verdict Tor the
defendants. They were then discharged
from further attendance at thus term. and the
court adjonrned until saturday mornins nj 10
O'Clock. 4 his being rule day. there Will be no
more Jury trials till Monday.
Court met at 10 o'clock Saturday morning.
In accordance alth the general custom, the
day being Saturday. il was devoted to the
disposition of causes on the argument list.
They embrace questions for argument On
demurrers and other legal questions, none of
them being questions of fact needing jury.
Divorces are also token up aud disposed of
on these rule" days. The following disposl-
tons of divorce applications were made :;
Canary vs. Canary WAS continued: Rogers Va.
Rogers and Crippen Vs. Crippen We're discon-
timed by the libellant's counsel.
The husband having died, the divorce of
Mary Il. Berry from William Berry was rem
dered unnecessary. The case was decided by
an appellate court even before any appeal was
taken.
Douglas W.. Douglas, Parker Va. Parker
and Watson vs. Watson were continued.
Divorces were granted i'll the following
cases Mary Reid VS.. John Reid, Kelly vs..
Kelly and lioherts Va. Roberts.
In the divorce case of Lungren w. Lungren
Harry Sharpley. ESD, was appointed IL COM
missioner to take testimony.
With one or two exceptions the above are
all the divorce cases on the argument list.
iiuyer assignee vs.. Deakyne which was set
down to be argued on demurrer was settled
by counsel.
Cardinello d. b. a. vs. the Mayor, &c. of
Wilmington was continued. Cardinello is the
Italian peanut vender who had his stand at
Fourth and Market streets and who was for
the violation of the statute forbidding the
obstruction of the side walk for exposing
goods for sale, fined by the Mayor. This case
Is an appeal from the fine imposed by the
| Mayor.
The Hollis Nandegrift case was continued
on the defendants application.
Messrs Lore and Maris argued the case Of
| Myers VS.. Eggner.
IL was an action involving will Under
| the SITS tute allowing married woman to
make will with the consent OF her husband,
there was Il provision that the husband should
| give his consent in writing signed and sealed
| i'll the presence of two witnesses.
| Mrs Myers made her will but instead of
the husbands complying with the statute he
| signed the will with her. The Court ruled
| this not sufficient and hence the will void.
| There has been a statute passed since
| QS75) allowing married woman to make u
| will with or without the husbands consent.
III Dean Brothers w. Davis. the Judgment
below was affirmed on the argument on the
| certiorari. and Harry Sharpley, ESD, carried
| of Judgment for Davis.
At O'Clock the court adjourned until Mon
| day morning at l0 o'clock.
Continued on third page.)