Daily Republican., 1882-05-23
FIFTH EDITION
COUNTY COURT

floceeui"ks this MorDinx-C.,
ciusion OF the Rey bold Ca. wy
Verdict for the Defeud.n,
Court convened at 10 O'CLOCK g.,
morning, and resumed procse iA Sin Ills
the Keybold case. Mr.. Rodney . - ). IN
for the defendants, and tis closed nd
charged the jury, who retired .t ot9uit ~ y
o'clock and after an absence nf ~ ,'' wv
minutes they returned with n NJ twenty
for the defendant for Sl34.3l. ''iu'ct
Mr.. Lore asked that the case ofu
ry l.. Sanders VS.. Philip r. ClarL hea, =
continued, on the ground that nn "
his principal witnesses was s;u,e HIe OF
Philadelphia, and that he himsaIHfA HA M
too i'll to conduct the CASE xa
Spruance on behalf of the nlain,;saf VI.
posed the motion, but the Court at op'
hearing the argument of counsel o,ss a,N
cd the case continued, and tho w;,Ua v,usl'
es discharged from further attsndaess aess
at this term. 'naanos
The case of Bellah, Quieley &o,
VS.. Peter 9. NAPLES was calieS w. W.
upon counsel stating their readina.sassa asa
trial jury was drawn and the o... NY,
proceeded with. Bird for the plainsses tase
and Robinson for defendants. This 'u
an action on book account, and tb.s'
was no defence. The iury w;thaae lu'ia
leaving the box rendered a verdio, iuOI y
favor of the plaintiffs for Sl226S ~
In the case of William P. Karr's .,
ecutrix, vs.. Isaac Murray, iudpmsa.
in favor of the plaintiff for S5l3 o wa,
entered by consent. wy
In the case of Sharpless and sonv =.
Henry +. Robelen and Ella Rohasa
Judgment was entered against MI.
Robelen, one of the defendants n,
Ss4030 'O
At l1.25 o'clock, James Reddeu Wa,
brought into Court and upon his conn.,
sci Harry Sharpley, Esq, stating tbai
his witnesses had not arrived, the tri,I
was continued until this afternoon
A jury was drawn and the case NJ
Ii. Il A. Keirsted VS.. George Y nsa]
kyne and Jennie Deakyne, gsrnisbes 4
w. w. Hopes was commenced, ,;ob
Rodney, Esq, for the plaintias Il
drawing this jury the name of jana
A. Anderson, a well known coJO,i
man of this city, was the first AM
drawn from the boy. As the first on'
drawn is always the foreman ofE
jury, Mr.. Anderson has the distinctjo1
of being the first colored man who eva,
occupied that position in this State,
There was no defence in the case AMI
the jury rendered a verdict in favor d
the plaintiff for S132.SS
Tue Diamond State Iron Compan,
vs.. Alfred II. Coyle. Bates & Hsi
the plaintiff and Bradorl
and Vandegrift for the defence.
This is an appeal from the decision
of a Justice of the Peace. Alfred n
Coyle was employed as a machinist b
the Diamond State Iron Compans
and received SIS per week. One ofth
rules of the company is that ifasu
ployee leaves without giving tw
weeks notice he forfeits whatever pay
may be due him,
Mr.. Coyle quit without giving the I'd
quired notice, and the company refuj
ed to pay him the two weeks wags
due. He brought suit before a Justic
of the Peace and obtained judgmeu
against the company. They appeale
from the decision and brought the cad
to Court.
Mr.. Coyle testified to the fact of haI
ing been employed by the company an
the amount of wages he was to receiva
On cross. examination Mr.. Coyle Al
mitted that he had only given TIM
days notice of his intention to quit Il
company. Mr.. Harrington opened
the Diamond State Company, and
planned to the jury the rulesof the COZ
pany. He said that in large ests
lishmert like the Iron wo:ks, wha
over 500 men were employed 1t VI
necessary to have stringent rules
their governmeLt Mr.. Coyle was
skilled workman and his leaving
the way he did, subjected the compa
to serious loss and annoyance.
Mr.. John 7. Davis testified that
is superintendent of the works 4
stated the fact of having empOy
Coyle, and defined his duties Ont
Cross.exauination by Mr.. Vandeg
he admitted that he had said to 70!
on the night that he engaged him
he wanted an answer whether heWoI
come or not, as there was another u
who wanted the place, and that slot
after Coyle quit he had employed
man. George Todd was sworn ana w
fed that lie is the secretary OF the w
pany.
After Coyle had quit, he came 70
office and asked for his pay, when
told him that as he haa
giving notice, he had lollsi ,
what was due him. He also lesu
that Coyle had said that be knew
had not complied with the rules,
he did not think that the law WV
sustain the company in keeping
still he would not sue loI
be never got it. Without concluuI
the case Court adjourned un'li oOV
this afternoon.