Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1885-12-17

1854, IN whlcn tney nccepteu MS terms OF
one-half cash and one-half in 80 days.
p. I. Il. Smith, teller of the First
National Bank, testified that the checks
came to him for collection. but the an
swer at the Wilmington and Brandywine
Bank was "not sufficient funds" and he
protested them.
William s. Haines was called and asked
IL the Kent Iron and Hardware Company
owed Forbes a. Banks a considerable
amount on April 26th. 1884, but Mr..
Nields objected to the testimony and was
sustained.
I Then the Wilmington and Brandywine
Bank books were produced, and Mr.. Rum
ford gave Forbes Il Banks balances, as
follows; April 22d, 1884, when the first
check was drawn, $16.25; April Oath,
when it was presented for payment, $3. III;
May I'd, when the second check was
given, $3.71. Mr.. Higgins then desired
to prove their balances from April 9th,
1884, until the protest of their second
check, but Mr.. Nields objected and was
sustained after another long argument.
Mr.. Higgins offered bill in equity and
the answer thereto, of the Malleabler Iron
Company vs.. Forbes Il Banks and Edwin
II. Banks to prove the insolvency of the
defendants at the time of their negotia-
tions with Dubois. Mr.. Nields objected,
and after another heated discussion, they
were admitted in part, all being excluded
except the averment in the bill, and
Forbes X Banks admission of insolvency
in their answer.
The plaintiff rested, and Mr.. Nields,
for tue defendants. moved nonsuit, on
had .rE.1, 4
the time of the taking of the goods, and
that Us the case was an action in tort, and
not on a contract, and the charge one of
the unlawful detention of the PLAINTIFF
goods, no proof had been offered to show
that when the plaintiff made demand for
his goods, the Malleable Iron Company,
under whose execution the works were
closed, had knowledge of any fraudulent
proceedings against the plaintiff by
Forbes Il Banks. He said the sheriff.
inventory under the execution WINS made
on May 18th, and the repleyin issued the
day following.
The matter was held under advisement,
and the court at 1880 o'clock adjourned
until 3 o'clock, p. M.
Court met again at O'Clock, in the
afternoon, and Benjamin Nields, Esq,
counsel for the defendants in the ease of
Dubois VS.. Forbes q Banks, resumed his
argument on his motion for nonsuit. MIR.
Higgins opposed the motion and
argument continued for three.quarters
OF an hour. In the course OF the
discussion, the bill in equity of the
Malleable Iron Company vs. Forbes u Banks
and the answer thereto, were touched upon,
MIR. Nields holding that only those portions
of these papers alleging and admitting the
insolvency Of the defendants were to be ad-
mitted, and that The judgment OF the Malle-
able'Iron Company, under which execution
was issued and the goods sold by the sheriff
was bona flde one. Mr.. Higgins opposed
this view, but as the court sustained MIR.
Nields, he asked that the trial be stopped
ut once by the withdrawal of u juror. The
court assented, the foreman of the. jury was
directed to step out of the box, and the case
continued until the next term.
Chief Justice Comegys delivered the
opinion of the court in the demurrer raised
by the defence in the case of the Farmers
Bank VS.. H. l.. Tatnall. The action was on
notes to the amount of $l1 900, on which II.
L. Tatnall was guarantor for HI. L.Tatnall
& Company, and the defence claimed that
the discounts were made several months
after the date of the guarantee, and that the
bank failed to notify him on the acceptance Q
of his proposition. The opinion Of the
court sustained the demurrer, and was con-
Cured in by Judge Wootten. Judge Hous
ton did not dissent, but did not concur in
the opinion.
At 4.55 o'clock the jury was discharged
from any further attendance at this te m
THE LATE ANDREW O. GRAY.
Edward G.. Bradford, Esq, addressed the
Court, ,eferring to the death of Andrew @.
Gray. Esq, on January 11th, 1885, and pre-
senting the resolutions subsequently
adopted Mt meeting of the Bar Associate n
of New Castle county.
After reading the resolutions addresses
were made by Mr.. Bradford, Chief Justice
Comegys and Judges Wootten and Houston.
On the opening of court at O'Clock Satur-
day morning Walter Bacon, ESQ.,, counsel for
Charles Robinson, colored, convicted of a
felonious assault upon Mrs. Ella +. Gardner
made motion fora new trial on the follow
ing grounds First, that one of the jurors,
John T. Allfrey, had, previous to the trial
not only formed, but expressed an opinion
relative to the guilt Of the prisoner; an nc
compunying affidavit from Charles w
Schurz set forth that on Tuesday evening
December Sd, had n conversation
with Allfrey at Seventh and Market
streets, when the latter said, 81 know that
nigger Robinson, and II am on the jury
I'll hang him - the affidavit was made be.
fore Esquire Vandegrift, and MIR. Bacon said
Schurz was In court ready to substantiate
his allegation. He further said that this was
his principal reason for the motion for .
new trial, as this expression disqualified
Allfrey as n juror in the case. Second
That some of the jurors knew OF tes
timony, which was ruled out by
| the court, but they having knowl
edge of II communicated 1t to others
and all were influenced by It,. Mr.. Bacor
| further held that the evidenceof the defence
attacking the character of the prosecuting
| witness for chastity was not successfully re
| butted by the State, and the prisoner wa
denied the benefit of the testimony. He alst
| referred to the doubtful testimony in rela
| tion to the marriage of the prosecuting wit
ness, she declaring that the marriage wa
performed by clergyman, at some placei i
/ New Jersey, the name of which she coult
not remember, while Mr.. Gardner declare,
that they were married in Camden, New
Jersey, by magistrate or justice OF tn
peace, thus conveying n strong doubt tina
| thew were married at all. On these point
| MIR. Bacon argued at length.
Deputy Attorney General Biggs, In reply
claimed that in the case of Juror Allfrey
tho defence, when he WIS called, waive'
the usual question as to whether he ha
formed and expressed an opinion whicl
d 3barred II new trial, even II it should b
proved that the juror had so formed an
expressed an opinion.
John L. Allfrey, the juror referred to, wa
sworn, and in answer TO MIR. Biggs, sal
that when he was called Mr.. Bacon waive
the question as to whether he had forme
and expressed any opinion. He also sal
he had expressed an opinion, but had nj
formed one. He was on the Davis jury an
with several others made an expression {
opinion in order that they might have
| good reason for being excused from Servin
ON the Robinson jury. He said, howeve
1 Il toni
tion to the case. He also was of the opinio
that he told Alexander b. Cooper, ESQ.,, thi
he thought Robinson was guilty and ougl
to be hanged. In fact, he made similar Q.
pressions to various persons for the purpo
, Of being kept Off the jury.
After the discussion the court decided
hold the matter under advisement, and d
nounce the decision at an adjourned sesslt
! Of the oyer and terminer court. Judl
Wootten said he disapproved of any attem
to receive tho testimony of any juror In {
!, attempt to either impeach or sustain b
verdict. If this practice was encourage
there would never be any verdiets.
THEODORE BECKER SENTENCED.
, Deputy Attorney General Biggs til,
! moved that sentence be pronounced up
Theodore f. Becker, who killed Horace
. MeGinnis, and was convicted of manslaug
3 ter. The prisoner was brought into COZ
and placed in the dock, and his wife al
Q came in, accompanied by a lady friend.
4 Becker stood up, and the chief justi
. imposed tho sentence of the court, as I,
2 lows: To forfeit and pay to the State
Delaware fine of $1,000, besides the COZ
Of prosecution, and to be imprisoned fol
k term of three years, beginning with to-d
|. and ending on the 18th day of Deoemb
J. 1888,
a Becker took the sentence without any O
4 parent emotion, but his wife broke down
a fit of bitter weeping and hastily left
room. The prisoner was at once return
/ to the cells.