National Republican., 1883-01-18
THE LAWS LESSON
To Those who Had Cases Before the Va
rious Courts Yesterday.
upRrME CouRr UNITED 8


SUPREME COURT UNITED STATES.
The following business was transacted in
the supreme court of the United States yes
terday.
Admissions to the bar, William Henry
Clark, of New York city, and Henry @. Whit
ney, OF Chicago, Ill.
iff in error, VS.. John +. Kimball. Submitted
by w. b. Gilbert for plaintiff in error and t.
G. Mather for defendant in error
No. 101. The Atlantic Works. appellant
VS.. Edwin J.. Brady, and No. 102, Edwin L.
Brady, appellant, VS.. the Atlantic Works
Argued by Assistant Attorney General Maury
for the Atlantic Works and William A. Alb
bott for f. l.. Brady.
No. 1926 Thomas Cochran ct al, plaintiff
in error, VS.. Augustus Schell, late collector,
&c, and No. 1927, Augustus Schell, late col
lector, plaintiff in error, vs. Thomas Cochran
ct al. Motion to advance submitted.
No. 143. Henry y. Chapman ct al, appel
lants VS.. the Board of Commissioners, of
Douglass county, Ncb. Argument com.
menccd by G. G.. Bonney for appellants and
continued by j. NJ. Woolworth for appellee.
Adjourned.
DECREE AGAINST A BANK.
Judge Hagner yesterday passed an order in
the case of Mrs. Barrett against the National
Bank of the Republic, the particulars of which
| 1881, Mrs Barrett procured u pension certiii-
cate for $4,000 which was deposited in the
bank by Mrs. Reinlinc, her daughter. Tho
| certificate Of deposit was lost and the bank
required an indemnity bond of $4,000, which
the complainant was unable TO give. Judge
Hagner directed decree to be prepared in
favor of Mrs Barrett, from which the bank
gave notice of an appeal.
JUDGE wYLIE's PROPERTY
| T,,t lao Loo
ner declined to rule out certain portions of
Judge Wyle's answer in the case of Webster
against Wylic and others in which the COM
plainant claims an interest in the estate of
the late Charles l.. Coltman, and that Judge
Wylie procured the title by irregularity.
Judge and Mrs. Wylie in their answer assert
that the false, fraudulent, and scandalous
claim, than which, as they believe, none more
baselcss wasever presented in any court, needs
further only to be supported by perjury and
forgery to complete its consistency" The
cOmplainants moved to strike out this portion
us being scandalous, but it was overruled
AN INTERESTING TECHNICAL POINT.
In the court in banc yesterday very in
teresting technical point was argued. In
May, 1870, Henry Strder was convicted of a
second otiense of petit larceny and sentenced
to two years imprisonment, but in Decem-
Der, 1850, he was pardoned. In March, 1882.
Strider was again tried for the same oHensc,
and the first conviction was cited as the first
otiense of petit larceny. His counsel raised
the point that the pardon, being uncondi-
tiOnal, wiped out the first otlcnse, and took
an appeal from the criminal court to the
court above. Decision was reserved.
FRANK II. FALL INDICTED.
The grand jury yesterday returned an in
dictment against Frank ii. Fall for corruptly
cndeavoring to influence II juror. The indict-
mcnt is n voluminous one, and rccites copy
of the agreement that Fall is alleged to have
given to Payne for Juror Brown to sign. The
witnesses are William X. Brown, A. c. Rich
ards, George o. Miller, John a. Moss, James
Leonard, Brewster Cameron and III. III. Wells
jr.
DIVORCE CASE DROPPED.
The divorce case of Charles Gersdorf against
Marie Gcrsdorf has been discontinued by the
plaintiff.
THE RECORD.
Equity Colirt-Justice Hd0ner.-Dugan vs.. Wood
commission to get answer of infant defendant'
ordered to issue. Young VS.. Walsh; ten days al
lowed complainant 10 plead. Central Natlona
Bank VS.. Hume; iei,ionce TO auditor to state re
ceiyers account. Webster VS.. Coltmnn; exception
, 10 answer of defendant Wylic oyerruled Gull
W. Loonoy: petition of Johanna Wolf, granted II
part and dismissed in part; Barrett vs. Bank
ordered to be prepared. Phnnix, Mutua
: Life Insurance company VS.. Grant; rule ON de
, fendunt Gran: returnable Jan. "a. Kendick VS.
, Kendlck testimony before j. Williamson ordered
, taken. Beneficial Endowment association vs.
, Boyle distribution of fund ordered. Parker VS.
Parker; decree vesling title oil bonds in complain
5 ant passed. AssiSnment for to-day-Nos. 2l, 2.
, Court IN Bdnc-1he Chief Justice Justices Coz an
Jdmes.-United states VS. Strder; submitted
= Bauer ct al. vs.. Tschillly ct al.; decree Drape
S VS.. HYDE motion for rehearing. Fisk, Clark
Y Flagg W.. Hollander Bros; decree. AdJourne
c until Saturday.