Daily Republican., 1883-12-13
FIFTH EDITION,
TINS MORNIA 0's COURT.


- - - ~~~v N~0N ~oobOoS
the ProfessiOasl Thief Ace-rus
hoaion n enc List case Den TED.
The Superior Court opened vt 0 0 clock
this morning with all the J Judges present
The Attorney. General said that A
motion had been made by l. G. Grubb
Esq, to quash the indictment in the
case Of George 8. Hagany, Jr., alias
Slim Jim, who Ia now 10 jail under the
professional thief act, but as he had
been 10 busy during this term he had
not had time to prepare for argument
He also said that the counsel for the
defendant had not filed his reasons for
the motion, and no moved that the
matter be postponed until the February
term.
Mr.. Grub objected TO the motion,
and said that by decision of Chief
Justice Gilpin In similar case, the
counsel for the prisoner WAS not re
quired to file his reasons. After some
little discussion the Court decided 70
hear the argument and instructed Mr..
Grubb 10 proceed.
He commended that the indictment was
defective, inasmuch that it did not de.
fine any particular act to show that the
defendant was common thief, and also
that the Legislature could not dispense
with any Of the definitions which
makes an offence at common law.
Mr.. GIubb read sections Of the act
which says that person can be indicted
under its provisions an a common thief,
and said this WAS unconstitutional, az
some specific offence must BIZ named in
the indictment TO make 1t valid.
He cited number Of authorities to
show that an Indictment TO be valid
and constitutional must specify the acts
with which the prisoner IL charged,
other wise, he could l,e tried twice for
the same offence. One indictment could
be framed charging him with lar.
ceny, and afterwards another on tue
same charge for being u common
thief. He made q number Of Citat ens
in support of his argument that
certain sections Of the act are unconst.
tutional.
The violation Of any rights Ruaran.
teed by the Constitution cannot I've en-.
forced.
just as the clock struck ten the Court
suspended the argument for the present,
and proceeded with other bu ,iness.
Louisa Il. Sutterley was sworn and
testified that material witness In the
suit Of Malssa w. Lingo against her
was now In another State, that she was
not able to get her present at this term,
and did not feel safe TO 20 TO trial with.
out her. The case. was postponed until
the next term.
}. l.. Vallandigham, ESD, said that
as he had not been able to secure the
attendance of witnesses for the defence in
the case Of Oliver W. Eastburn VS.. Peter
Legates, he asked TO have it postponed,
aud az Mr.. Hoffecker, for the plaintiff,
did not object, the request was granted
The jury in the case of Duncan Bros.
vs.James II. Aaron WAS charged by the
Chief ustice and retired ut 1855 O.
clock.
The case of Il. II. McWhorter & Co,
vs.. Eli Seal was taken up for trial, with
Charles b. Lore, Esq, and Harry Elm.
mons, Esq, for the plaintiff, and Ben
jamin Sields, Esq, for the defendant
After the jury was drawn, the de-
cision of the Court on the motion for an
arrest OF judgment In the case Of Lewis
List was read by the Chief Justice. 1t
reviews the arguments Of the deien'
dant's counsel and the Attorney General
and after deciding that the indictment
was drawn in accordance with law, and
that the jury had the power to convict
of differ, ut degrees Of crime, said the
motion was ovcrruled.
Mr.. Harrington called attention to
the fact that there was another motion
for new trial IN the case of Lewis 7,
List but the Court did not take any
action In the matter.
Mr.. Emmous then opened the Nc
Whorter cas- 10 tue jury, and said this
was a snr to recover Sl05 with interest,
due for Il i~apink machine sold TO the
defendant, Hi Seal, in 1882.
| Charles II. McWhortrr sworn, and
nstitied that he ia member of the
firm o! L.. II. McWhorter Il Co.. and
to the tact OF havi' K sold a reapiDg
machu. to III, defendant In June, 1857.
The witness vas cross examined by
Mr.. Nilds, AID when he tinally releas
ell hin, Mr. Lore said he would resi-
his cas-.
Eli Sea-, the defendant, was then
sworn, and testified thatshe resid, $ ntar
Newark, this county. He bought this
machine from New horter & Co., with
the understanding that he was TO pay
for il, if it worked satisfactorily 1t did
not answer for the work, and the wit
ness pul il j. he wagon he use, " here II
sill IeMp'ns,
Mr.. Lore subjected the witness ;os
searching DISCRIMINATION, and sue
Iruu,i.I in Shnui mo that hp had moi only