Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1883-12-13

clearly proven, and said the only object Mr..
Veazey had in bringing this suit was to assert
his rights, and get rid of troublesome
neghbor.
Mr.. Spruance closed at 10 o'clock, and the
jury was charged by the chief justice, and
retired ut ~ 20 O'Clock.
William L. Barton, Esq, late of Washing.
ton, ID. o., was. on motion of Mr.. Spruance
admitted to practice at the bar of the courts
1 of this county.
Benjamin Nields, Esq, filed narr in the
case of Mary kirkpatrick VI. Martha Kirk
patrick's executor This il suit for debt on
note alleged to have been drawn by Martha
kirkpatrick, deceased, in favor of Mary
kirkpatrick for $1,000, payable six months
after the death of Martha. The defendant is
represented by John G. Patterson, Esq.
The jury in the trespass case came in at l. 10
O'Clock, with verdict in favor of James L.
VeaZey of 518 06 with costs, and court then
adjourned until O'Clock in the afternoon.
The somewhat singular case that was
begun Just before the noon adjournment
occupied the attention OF the court Fri
day afternoon. In September, 1879,
Martha Kirkpatrick died In this CITY,
leaving some property and will. Some
time previous to her death, she executed
several instruments of writing, ordering
that certain amounts be paid to different
parties in six months after her
death. Among them WAS one promising
or ordering $1,000 to be paid to
Mary kirkpatrick. When the time speci-
fed expired, demand was made Tor the
money, which the executor refused to
pay, claiming that these different instru-
ments of writing constituted part of the
will OF Martha Kirkpatrick, and must be
proved before the registrar of wills, the
same as any other legacy. The plaintiff
contends that this is a promissory note,
aud as suoh can be sued for aud judgment
obtained against the estate.
Benjamin Nields, Esq, appeared for
the plaintiff and urged that these instru-
ments OF writing were notes and as ouch
became debts against the estate, and
should be tried by jury.
This was opposed by John C. Patter-
son, Ed, and also William g. Whiteley,
Esq, who is engaged as counsel for the
defendant in another suit Of like nature.
The argument was continued until
after A O'Clock, when counsel agreed to
argue the question whether or not evi
denoe could be produced to show that
these instruments we're given without
any consideration.
ment, and claimed that the fact of the
document being sealed was sufficient evil
deDoe of consideration, and cited num-
ber OF authorities in support of his posi-
tion. He continued speaking until 6
o'clock, when court adjourned until 10
o'clock Saturday morning.
The superior court resumed proceedings at
10o'clock Saturday morning, with Chief Justice
Comegys and Associates Wootten and Hous-
ton on the bencn.
l. q. Grubb, Esq, filed motion to quash
the indictment against George Hagany,
alias Slim Jim. found during the present term
of court, under the law passed by the last
Legislature providing for the arrest and inn
prisoment OF known thieves and suspicious
characters
The motion was entertained, and Deputy
Attorney General Cooper directed to make a
note oft. 1t is the intention of Mr.. Grubb
to argue the motion ON the ground that
several of the most important provisions of
the act are unconstitutional, and consequently
imperative.
Mr. Nlelds resumed his argument in the
case of Mary Kirkpatrick Va. Martha Kirk
patrick.
He argued that this instrument was an evil
dence of debt, and the very fact of Its being
sealed and attested by witnesses was sufficient
to show that that was the intent of the
maker He claimed that it would not be COM
petent to introduce testimony in regard to
the consideration, as the seal carried that
with it. He spoke about half an hour, and
cited number OF authorities iu support VI
his position.
John @. Patterson, Esq, made the opening
argument for the defendant. and contended
that the wording of this instrument. and the
fact OF its being given under seal, clearly
implied that it was the intention of the testa-
tDt tf.f X krlfn a a
bequest, and not that 1t should be con-
silered a debt against the estate He con-
tinued his argument until court adjourned,
shortly after | o'clock, until O'Clock in the
afternoon.
The argument in the case of Mary
Kirkpatrick va. Martha Kirkpatriok's
Executor, was finished on Saturday and
the court held the matter under consid
GRAFTON.
The chief justice was not present at
the afternoon session, and Judge
Wootten presided. The report of Walter
II. Hayes, Esq, the commissioner ap-
pointed by the court TO take testimony in
The divorce case of Mary Walls vs. Samuel
Walls, was presented by Benjamin
Nielde, Esq, who said that the allega
tious of cruelty on the part of the hus-
band has been sustained, and there had
| hepn no defense.
As there were number of cases
against the Washington & Western rail
road company, where Judgment had been
obtained by default, jury was em
| psneled at the request OF Charles b..
| Lore, ESQ, attorney for the plaintiffs, to
| confirm the amounts. The following are
| the parties as entered on the docket,
| with the amount tor which judgment was
| given in favor OF each Motley & Ster-
ling, $9S7 60; Thomas Thornton, 1866 IL;
r. J.. Mshaffy & Co., $l9l,48; Samuel +.
Beach, $121.52; Charles P. Jsuney,
| s5lS O2; Charles U. williams, 1886 IS;
Edward H. Quintard, $268 OF; Andrew j..
Detriek, 81, ,427 50.
| After these cases were disposed OF. the
asme jury heard the testimony of Martha
| e. Dubois in suit brought by her
against Thomas T. Maloney for 1868 25,
which she alleges is due her for board.
They rendered judgment in her favor
for $2S7,99, being the amount claimed
with interest.
The case of John Merrick va. Clayton
C. Thsokery was brought to the notice OF
the court by L. g. Bradford, Ed, who
stated that Judgment had been entered
on the usual terms also in the case o.
John M. Houston vs.. the same
Mr.. Bradford also presented the case o
William Ii, Pierson VS.. Liverpool 4
Tendon & Globe Insurance company, AND
moved that the declaration OF the
plaintiff be set aside on the ground q
irregnlarity. There being no Othei
business ready, court adjourned at q 81
o'clock until 10 O'Clock Monday morning
AS soon as court opened Monday morning
Charles b. Lore, Esq, called Charles Brooks
to the stand who, after he was sworn, testified
that the amounts We're correct OH whlcl
judgments were entered last Saturday, il
favor of certain parties against the Wash
ington Il Western railroad company.
jury was drawn and the case Of DuncaI
Bro. & vas. James IL. Aaron, proceeded with
}. II. Jr, and f. Hofle 'ker, Esqs. appeared
for the plaintiffs, and Benjamin Nields, Esq.
for the defendant. This suit is brough
under the mechanics lien act, to recove
s1S767 for hardware furnished the defend
ant by the plaintiffs.
Richard Duncan testified he il a membe
of the firm; he identified the diferen
charges on his books, and said the article
were ordered by Mr.. Aaron himself, to b.
used on some houses he was building a
Browntown; some of the charges were mad
by Mr., Simmons clerk.
Henry Duncan affirmed, and coroboratet
the testimony of his brother some of thes
goods were sent to the houses on Strout
street, Browutown, by Aaron's ordor, ant
sometimes he would take the goods himself
Aaron had offered to pay the bill with notes
, which the witness refused to accept; tn
entries for these goods were marked Brown
town" on the books, to show where the hard
ware was used. These goods were sol
J previous to October Sd, 1881.
George T. Simmons testified that he Is EN-