Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1885-05-29
Circuit Court

The case of Neale vs.. Roby, which was
being argued at the close of our last report was
decided on Thursday evening in favor of Roby,
the jury, heing'so instructed by the Court, gave
their decision without leaving the box.
Friday Court met Friday at the usual
hour with a full bench. The case of State vs..
Carleton Spaids was decided. In this case Mr..
Spaids was indicted for failing TO get out his
license as merchant promptly on the LIST day
of May and tor having sold goods without
having license in his possession. He pleaded
guilty without going to trial and was fined $50
and costs being the lowest penalty allowable
| in such cases In imposing the fine in this case,
Judge Stone stated that it had come to his
know ledge that many merchants in the county
had violated the law in the same manner, and
hereafter he would instruct all grand jnries to
| ineu ire particularly into such cases and TO il
dict whenever it was found that merchant
had failed to get his license promptly as he old
! license gave him no power to sell goods after
that date The sheriff gives ample notice to
merchants of The fact that this must be done
and the law would hereafter be strictly enforced
if it took the grand jury FIVE weeks to finish
their Investigations.
The case of State VS. William Fenwick, color
ed, was then taken up. In this case it will be
remembered, Feswick indicted for an as
sault with intent 10 kill Mr.. Jos. H. Mattingly
in October last, and was tried al the last
November term and convicted, but was award
al a1 he of 10
which body the case had been taken on a writ
of error He was tried by jury and again
convicted and sentenced TO the penitentary for
years Wilmer and Edelen for State Mitchell
and Magruder for defendant. The case occupied
the entire day and the verdict of the jury was
brought down about 8! O'Clock that event g.
The grand jury made their report to-day
after which they were discharged with the
tharks Of the Court.
Saturday Court met al 81 o clock with full
bench. The first case WAS that sf Eenr. Nealt
VS. W H. Bruce and John F. Brute. This
Was an action for trespass in which Nesle
claimed that Bruce had removed trees growing
on his premises and ase a line OF fencing
which be had put up. The trespass had been
committed close TO the boundary of the farms
owned by the parties respectively which ad-
joined. A jury was impauslled tor the trial, |
but the plaintiff failed TO establish The bou ndary
of his farm and also to prove the trespsss ana
a non pros. was entered by his counsel and the
jury was discharged. Mgruder or plaintiff,
Mitchell and Edelen for defendant.
Walter Holt, ce!ored, indicted for brutaIly /
beating his wife. The indictment contained
two counts, one for brutal assault and the
other simple assault. Tried By jury, found
guilty on second count, and sentenced 10 the
county Jail for 90 days and to pay 6ne OF SIS. |
Wilmer for State, Posey for defense. The
petit jury were then discharged and Court ad- |
journed until Monday.
Monday Court called on Monday a, log
olock with Judges Stone and Crane on the
bench. No business of any importance WAS
transacted and Court remained in session but
short time.
Tuesday The Court took up the equity
case of Chapman, Administrator OF Hunger
ford, against \ J Smoot and wife, which bad
been specially assigned for this day. Judges
Brooke and Crane on the Bench. This a
billed filed by Gen Chapman as administrator
of Gerard W. HunGeTford, deceased TO ioreclose !
a mortgage for balance OF purchase money
held by Mr.. Hungerford on the farm of Or /
Smoot known as "Sscieiy Hin, - The balance
due on the mortgage amou u ting 10 about $1,000. +
DR.. Smeot claimed u credit for certain promis- .
sorry notes of Mr. F. ". Weems amounting TO
81 500 which he claimed he had asst gn.d to .
Mr. Hinge, ford in his life time TO be a credit .
on the mortgage. The quesiion in controversy .
was whether the amount OF these notes had or
had not already been credited upoR the purch-
ase money for the land The case was ably /
argued by Gen. Chap nan and Jadge Msgruder
for plaintiff and Messre Edeles, Mitchell aud
Matthews for respondent. The whole Of Tues
days and Wednesdays sessions were occupied
in the hearing of this case, the arguments be-
ing concluded late on "wednesday afternoon.
The decision was held SUD cHriI and Court
then adjourned.