Morning journal and courier., 1885-10-15
THE COURT RECORD.

THE COURT RECORD. Superior Court = Ofvn Side-Judge Sanford. This court came in yesterday morning at 10 o'clock
 All the cases which were down for Tues day on the assignment list were transferred to yesterdays list. The cases of Webb against Goodnough, Freedman against Bry an, WinchelI against Coney, Weleh against Welch, Foskett & Bishop against Admiral Foote post, and Todd against Munson, were passed until later in the week The hearing in the case of Talcott H. Rus sell, receiver of the National Life and Trust company, against Charles H. Hamilton was set down for this afternoon. The case of George H. & E. L. Beecher vs Garwood M. Baldwin ct al. went to trial, Messrs. Clark and Rogers appearing for the plaintiffs and ex-Judge Stoddard for the de- fendants. It was argued on a demurrer. The facts alleged by the plaintiffs are that the defendant sold Mrs. E. Louise Beecher I the property corner of Whal1ey avenue and ! Dwight street, where the rink stands. She ! paid SIS, ,000. The property was represented \ as being free from all encumbrance. It I turned out that the president and fellows of [ Yale college held mortgage of the proper | ty. They foreclosed and Mrs. Beecher had to get out. She now sues for $15, ,OOO dam ages.
 In the case of Foskett & Bishop. vs. Ad- ! miral Foote post, G.. A. R., an action to re- \ cover a sum of money which was attached ! for a debt of Peter R. Carl, MT. Russell ! claimed that Mr. Coney, MT. Carlls son-ln, ! law, had appeared as party defendant and filed an answer, which BIr. Russell, counsel | for Foskett & Bishop had not been able to ! IT hat Mr. be taken so that it could be seen just what | his answer was, or else he should be sum | moned into court. He asked Attorney I Whiting, counsel for Coney, if he would ' bring his client into court and he answered that he would bring in who he pleased. E. \ P Arvine, attorney for the post, said that Mr. Russell had been told that MT. Coney was to appear in the case, and John H. Whiting, counsel for Coney, said there was nothing new in the answer his client had filed. Coney claimed that the fund which was attached belonged to him. The divorce case of Carrie E. Bromham vs William w. Bromham, was referred to William K. Townsend as committee at the
 request of Judge Deming, counsel for defen- dant
 Court adjourned until this morning at 10 o'clock.
 Superior Court-Crimtnal Side-Judge
 Torrance. This court came in yesterday morning ct 10 o'clock.
 The arguments in the case of Robert See ley, assault upon James H. Mott and F. l..
 Richards and popularly known as the Wire mill case, were concluded and the case given to the jury. The jury returned verdict of guilty Judge Torrance sentenced Seeley to pay fine of $50 and be imprisoned in the county jail 60 days. That was the sentence
 in the lower court.
 The five cases against Robert Wilson of Branford, burglary, and one case for being tremp, were nolled by State Attorney Doo- little. It was shown that the man was in sane and not accountable for deeds he com mitted, nor is the jail or State prison fit place for him. Wilson does not belong in Branford, but is tramp. He broke into several shore houses at Indian Neck.
 Other nolled cases were those of Clarence
 Belden, alias Clarence Evans, burglary, $70; Robert w. Bristol, assault and breach of the peace, $20 Frederick Myers, Sunday law. S20; John Ward, breach of the peace, $15. The case of James Cox of New Haven, charged with embezzlement, was the next one taken up. Cox was bound over for pur- Joining $57 50 belonging to Miss Winifred
  1884. Cox was defended by A. N. Wheeler The evidence was concluded and the opening arguments made by Attorney Cable for the State Court then adjourned until fhis morn
 ing at 10 o'clock.
 Court of Common Pleas-Judge Sud- ley. This court came in yesterday morning at
 10 o'clock.
 The case of George Barrie, of Philadelphia,
 vs. s. E. Merwin, jr., was next tried. The suit is to recover $s0 which the plaintiff claims to be due for several volumes of eteh ings and steel engravings which the defend ant ordered of the plaintiff, who is a Phila- delphia publisher. They were to be sold on subscription at ssO per copy, the number is sued being limited to one thousand. The pictures were warranted to be proof copies of
 the best engravings. Among the subscrib- CTS was General Merwin. He received and paid for eight copies represented and four more were sent him. These he refused to pay for on the ground that the pictures they contained were not up to the standard. Hence the lawsuit The case was concluded in the afternoon.
 Court adjourned until this morning at 10 o'clock.