Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-11-29
THE NOVEMBER SESSIONS.

rns s.vera, Cases Before the Cours-Tne
Plaintiff, In . Cnso Plead heir
own Cause.
BEFORE JUDGE PATTERSON.
In the case of Martina Eckert, alleged
lunatic. VS.. Milton B. Eshleman, trav-
erser, tho whole of yesterday and this
morning was occupied in hearing testi-
m0ny. The defense called number Of
witnesses to prove the sanity OF Martha
Eckert now and prior to the time Of the
inquisition of lunacy. The defense rested
late in the afternoon, after which the
plaintiff opened the rebuttal and called
witnesses to prove that Martha Eckert is
insane. On trial.
Wm. Lutz for the use Of John h.
Moore vs.. James A. Richards ct al. sci fa
sur Mechanics lien, to recover S222. So a.
legged to be due for material furnished,
Sc, to building of the defendant in Sec
ond street, Columbia. In this case the
plaintiff suffered non suit.
The following cases were settled
Adam B. Baer vs.. J. p. kuight, sun
mons in trespass.
Same vs.. same, summons in trespass.
Annie NJ. Goods use vs.. Levi Rick.
seeker, executor Of Henry Shafiiner, decd,
| summons in trespass.
BEFORE JUDGE LIVINGSTON.
Joseph Hinkle vs.. Christian Hershey ct
al. Sci IA sur mechanic lien to recover a
balance of S115.4 alleged to be due 70.
material, work, &C., used in the construc.
Walnut streets, Columbia. Verdict In
favor of plaintiff for s207.43.
George Shoff and Jacob Z. Good vs..
| Thomas r6uor This rc$i ~,
of eiectment brought to recover posses
sion of tract of land in Pequa township,
containing So perches, with improvements
thereon, the right of possession to which
plaintiffs say is in them and not in the
defendant.
| The lower court room was crowded
with lawers anI others to hear this novel
case, there being no lawyers ON the one
side. The plaintiffs severally opened
their cases to the jury, stating what they
intended to prove. They then began t.
offer oral aud documentary evidence, and
objections were made by the defense .;
every point. The plaintiffs stated that
they could not understand why so many
objections were offered. They worked
hard for some time trying to get in their
evidence and, after Offering to show theil
deed to the defense if they would show
theirs. for the purpose of proving that
theirs (the plaintiffs) title was equal il
not prior to that Of the defense, they sat
down and informed tho court that they
would rest.
! The defense asked for verdict for the
defendant as tho plaintiff had failed to
prove anything. =
| The court stated that tho plaintiff had
como into court entirely unprepared with
their case they would not order = verdict
in favor of tho defense, but would order
a non suit to be entered this was done
and Mr.. Good, for the plaintiff, moved
that the non suit be stricken off. The cas-,
will now como up for argument in tht
December argument court. '-
Admitted to tho Bar.
Edward ?. BrintcD, vino has been Il Law
student in the Office Of Samuel II. Rey
nolds, esq, after having passed Il yer.
brilliant examination, on motion of Mr.
Reynolds. was this morning admitted t,
practice in the several courts Of Laucaste
county. Mr.. Brintcn is a son Of VIM. P
Brinton, esq Of South Queen street, thi'
city. He is q graduate OF Franklin anc
Marshall college and popular young mar
and has given ample evidence of tho pos
session of talents which vii! mako b q pre-
fessional career honorable and successful
Last evening, after Mr.. Brinton hat
passed his examination, his father, VIM
2. BrintOa, esq.,, gave ID handsome enter
tainment to the examining committee, tht
judges of the court and few othe,
guests, at his rcsidenc. On South Queer
street.