Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1882-11-24

ne November term Vi Tue NilEult SOuTl
met on Monday, with Judge Stone on the
bench. The selection Of the juries was pro-
ceeded with and the grand and petit iuries
determined as follows:
GRAND JURY.
VIM. Mex Burroughs (Foreman)
Henry Neale. Albert B. PoSey ..........
Tbad. Nudd Reed Wills. ............
VIM. J. Burch. .........D. J. Bragunier
John W. Albrttain 800. VIM. D. Posey ....-......
r. Sellman Burch. ......E. d. K. Bean............
Andrew J. Walker......John !. Jenkins. ..........
Francis W Weems. Richard L. Mardock....
Robt. A Chapmau......Alex. II. Robertson.
Jos. 7. Ward Recommendation 7. Turner.
Study Posey. Darby Chunn............
Alex. NJ Bryan .........Pere Wilmer, Jr.........
PETIT JURY.
John S Gibbons......John F. Bailey...........
Rich trd 7. Boarm IN. Geo. II. Albrittain......
Fancis A. Carpenter. ..Chas. Stewart,.........
John T. INSTRUMENTATION H. Freeman.
Fred k A. Richmond. Thos. E. Speake.........
Thos. j. Arnold ........E. Hyland Draw ....
Geo. j. r. Huntt........Geo. \. GoldSmith......
Chas c. Perry Edward Berry..........
Chas. Edward Cotey...........
VIM. Ohm l.. Budd ............
Philip 4. Sasscer. ......E. Fairfax MaSon.........
j. Marbury Carpenter. John F. Barbour.........
UeO l. -.
Judge Stone then delivered brief charge to
the Grand Jury, after which they retired 10
their chamber The docketS wore then called
over and some formal orders passed. Judge
j. Parran Crane arrived shortly after noon,
and presented his certificate OF qualification
and took his seat on the bench
Tuesday-On Tuesday the appeal docket
was taken up, and the day was consumed in
the trial of the case of Marshall Chapman vs..
the B. & P. R. R. Co. which was tried BY
Jury This WAS action by plaintiff TO re-
cover damages for the killing Of colts OF
plaintiff by a train of defendants near Hof-
mans Mil. Considerable evidence was given
on the part of Railroad Company, by which
they enaeavored to show that it WAS foggy
morning and objects upon the track were not
clearly distingushable in consequence TWAS
also deyeloped in the evidence that the glass
window looking from til. ngineerS cab upon
che track ahead was clouded with moisture.
These facts, together with the evidente that so
soon ms the cells were distinguished by the
engineer lie rang his bell aud put down the
brakes, were argued by the defendants council
as showing reasonable care on the part of tue
Defendants agents, and avoiding any response
bilityou its part for the accident. They also tried
t. show contribut>ry negligence on the part OF
the plaintiff in allowing his stock TO Lerunniug
=; large unattended On the par of the plain
considerable evidence was given in rebutia
showing that there was no fog on the morning
in question, and plaintiffs counsel showed 10y
the statute law of Mary land and the decisions OF
the Court of Appeals that the contriLutory
negligence on the past 0! plaintiff does not, in
this State exeulpate the defendant in such
case, unles the defendant prove reasonable
cafe on its part. One of the prayers offered by
the defendan, and granted by the court WAS TO
the effect that if so soon as the defendants
engineer sac The object on the track, he gave
the customary alarms and put down the brakes
then this amounted 10 reasonable and de
feated the right of recovery. The VAS
given TO the jury shortly before o clock, and
after remaining out about minutes they re-
turned verdict for the plaintiff for the full
amount camei-SlC0. Gen. Chapman re-
presented the plaistiff, and defendant re-
presented by J. Il. Mitchell and Samuel Cox
Heanesday.-The case of Walter f. " God
use II. F. Moore, VS.. John G. HGngerford was
taken up, and piainif suffered voluntary
non-pros. TEo appeal cases between DAM. J
Bragunier and Pliny Bowie were next tried by
the court and Judgment given in favor OF Bowie
in both cases. The next was crow head case
between Edwar L. HUNT and The county COM
missioners. The plaintiff claimed compensa-
ton for certain crow sca!ps, but the county
commissioners refused payment On the ground
that the certificates presented did not show that
the birds were taken as we'll as killed in Charles
county The court decided that the claimants
Of the bounty in these cases must show to the
commissioners, eitLer by the certificate or by
ord testimony, that the birds were both ta
ken and killed in Charles county The next
case was an appeal, between T. r. Farrall and
J. C Howard, in W hich Farrall replerined Ger
tain wheat cut of car Of the B. and P. R r
Co, and subsequently abandoned his case
This action arose upon the appeal bond given
by the plaintiff The court decided that upon
this bond the defendant could ecover such
d,mages only as the railroad company sustain
ed, and as now were proved they recovered
nothing. Judge Crane was called away to-
day on occount Of sickness in his family
TKursd0y.-The case Of James Hill vs. Geo
Richmond was taken up, a jury being impanel-
ed. Hill, who was a tenant of Richmond,
sued for the value of certain crops which be
claimed he was prevented from making BY the
act of his landlord. After saearing a number
of witnesses, the plaintiff abandoned his case
and suffered verdict against him. Matthews
for pia MI if Po:ey for defence. At the con-
clusion of this case court adjourned.
Call and see 1t.
We have received and have on exhibition
at our office NAM moth beet, not lead beat,