Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1884-09-16
A VERDICT RENDERED.
N rnn 4ioX snv,.nx ususou oAsr
rhe Uourt Decides n kAvor OF Pia,ntiu so-
cause Deteuoaats rsiisd 60 Appeal
From u m natrris ,,esres

The Ucurt peoiicsi, kavor OF Pia,nt,u sc-
cause Deteooaats rsnsd 60 Appeal
From y Masters ucerce.
In the Briokerville church case all Of
Monday was taken up in tho argument by
counsel on the admissibility OF tho pro
oeedinSs had some years ago, in an equity
suit, aud the court this morning decided
to admit the evidence. The following is u
btiet history of tho proceedings and, ss it
will be soen, the defendants were shut out
from offering any evidence
Some years ago bill in equity was filed
by the defendants in this suit, praying for
al INJUNCTION restraining the ministers of
the Lutheran miuisterium and that part OF
the council adhcrpg to tho ninstorium
from occupying the pulpit and interfering
with the management OF the church Tho
evidence in the case WAS heard by mas
ter and he decided the question on its
merits The master recommended q dis
misssl Of the bill and the court made q
decree as recommended by the master.
No appeal was taken and the decree be
came iinsl judgment. The court now
held that tho defendants In this case aro
barrod by that Judgment from setting mp
their defense in this action because the
subject matter involved in this case Is the
same as in the equity proceeding hence
| the whole matter the court decided ID
res ddtu6tcdta.
The court said the question was one OF
law entirely for the court. Ii the court Is
| wrong in their conclusions the gentlemen
| representing the defense have their RENE .
dy, and We instruct you and direct you
that on the ground Of the conclusiveness
| of the former judgment in the equity case
the plaintiffs must recover, and wo direct
i'm NJ Ia.
plaintiffs, The verdict was rendered q,
| directed.
Counsel for defendants excepted to the
charge OF the court to the jury and cspeo-
| tally 10 that part OF the charge instruotins
she jury to find for the plaintiff.
The above case has been before our
courts for years. 1t was tried twice
occupying many days time, and in eaci
case the jury failed to agree. On the frs
trial the jury stood eight for plaintiff Z
four for defendant, and the second trial
stse for plaintiff to three for defendant
The ssse will, no doubt, DO taken to tn,
supreme court for final adjudication.
| Current Busiuess.
Elizabeth Frey, Mannheim borough, wa
divorced from her husband, Charles Frey
on the ground of desertion.
The court affirmed the amendment L
the charter of the MDnnerohor hall asso
citation, increasing the capital stock fror
eco, 600 to $50, 600,
Il. NJ. Morrow and 8. F. Shenk wer
appointed to spprsise the property Of \
Bitner aud wife. whose assignment va
recently recorded.
| seeEIng Divorces.
This is one of the weeks in the year /
which applications for divorce can be filed
aud thus far the following parties want I
be divorced {:
Susan Dissiuger by her next friend j,
rome Iocum, from Samuel DiBsinger, 0
she ground of desertion.
Christian May from Susanna May, o
she ground of adultery.
Fanny Reynolds by her next friend job
StIickler, from George W. Reynolds, o
tho ground of desertion.
Alfred r. Lsiby VS.. Caroline Leiby o
the ground of desertion.
Nicholas Peck from Malinda Peck, @
the ground of adultery.