Daily Republican., 1885-12-11
Superior Court.
THE JURY BENDER A VERDICT
: IN THE ENGLAND vs.. FOxBKS
...,, AND BANKS CASE.
SIMILAR CASE.

N I'M EN- GLAND w FVhhkS
...- AND BANKS CASE.
ANOTHER SIMILAR CASE.
Immediately after Court opened on
aft ernoop, the jury ia the
case of Aaron @ England vs. William
Forbes, Robert Z. Banks and James
Martin, Sheriff, were charged by the
Chief ustice. He explained, at length,
the law relating to sales and the effect
of represen tations of solvency to obtain
goods from "a ller. The jury were
also charged that If they believed the
plaintiff had, under his replevin, taken
soods which did not belong to him they
could render verdict for the value Of
these goods in favor of the defendant,
but it would not prevent them finding
verdict for nominal damages, with
costs. for the plaintiff. The jury retired
at 3 80 o'clock.
Judgment was allowed for the plain
tiff in the case of the Lum berman's
N National Bank vs.. George Churchman,
the amount TO bo ascertained by the
prothonotary.
Ajury was then drawn, and the case
of Howard M. Dubois va. Forbes &
Banks and James Martin, Sheriff, was
taken up for trial, with Anthony Hig-
gins, Esq, for the plaintiff, and Benz,
Nields and Thomas Davis, Esqs for the
defendants. The case was opened by
Mr.. Higgins, who stated tito the jury
as follows
In April, 1884, William Forbes went
to Philadelphia and called at the fac.
tory of the plaintiff to see about buy
| ing some carriage wheel rims. Mr..
Dubois was not there, but he received
a letter afterwards from Forbes &,
Banks. stating that they wanted to buy
lot of rims on sixty days time. The
plaintiff answered this letter and told
them that he could not sell in that
way, but would sell for half cash, and
half on an accepted draft at 80 days.
A few days later he received another
letter from the firm with an order for
| the rims, and a check enclosed for half
| 6ne amount of the bill. He sent them
rims valued at S237 80, April 18Th, and
deposited the check in baak, bu: in a
few days 1t was returned 70 him
marked, "no funds" He then dc.
posted his own check to make this
amount good, and came to this city to
inquire into the matter.
When he saw Forbes be made some
excuse, and gave him another check,
out this was also returned protested.
Mr.. Dubois again came to this city,
and. upon making inquiry learned thai
| 9anks, one OF the tirm had given a
Judgment bond, April 9th, on which
| execution had been issued, and levy
| made on the 11th of the same m onth.
He then replevied his goods, and
this suit is brought to obtain damages
| and Judgmentagainst the firm of Forbes
| 81 Banks.
Howard M. Dubois was sworn, and
| testified that he resides in Philadelphia
and is engaged in the msn ufacture o.
carriage wheels and rims at Front and
Otter streets. On April 9th, 1884, he
had been away from his business several
| days on account of his wifs's sickness,
and was called upon at his residence
by his bookkeeper; from Information
which he received from BIN the witness
wrote letter to Forbes & Banks. He
after wards received letter from them
enclosing a check for $l13, and sent
them lot of rims which they had or.
deced. The witness deposited this check
in the KsnsihRton Bank, Philadelphia
and two days later 1t was returned tt
him.
He then came to this city and saw
Forbes, when he gave him checf
dated April 26th, on the National Banl
of Wilmington and Brandywine, which
he also deposited in the Kensingtor
Bank, Philadelphia, but it was return
ed to him the same as the first. Th'
witness again came to this city ant
went first to the bauk, and from ther
TO Forbes & Banks place.
He saw Mr. Kirk and he in answer t
the witness question said the business
was in very bad way. and very mucl
, mixed. The witness then went IN tn
shop, and saw q pile of the rims, whic!
he counted the best he could.
II When he accepted the checks from
! the defendants he had no knowledg
that there was a jud gment entered
against them He did not see MI
I Forbes at the factory and went to hi
house on Orange street; he me
Forbes coming out of the alley aac
: told him that he did not consider 1t al
> honest transaction. Forbes replie'
that he was not to blame, as the whol'
! = thing was cooked, and Banks was Try
ing to get him out. The witness aske'
him to 60 with him to the factory an
help him recover his goods, but he cal
: he could not do IT, as the plac
was under execution. AS 1t was lat
u In the day, the witness returned I
, Philadelphia and put the matter 4
the hands of his counsel After II
d writ of replevin was issued /
Q again came to this city and receive
eI77 sets of carriage rims, out OF 14O se
which he had sent them.
J. He was cross.examired at length o
fl Mr. Nields, and when they finishe.
}, the Jury was discharged until thl
l. morning.
n The jury in the case of Aaron
England VS.. William Forbes, Robert
/. Banks and James Martin, Sheriff, can
In at O'Clock with q verdict in iav'
J. of the plaintiff for the amount OF b
II claim, and in favor of the defendal
= for centa. The Court informed the
that they had made a mistake, that
the plaintiff had recovered his goods
eould not receive anything but nomin
damages of 6 cents, but that the d
PENDANTS were entitled to the value
. their spokes, which the plaintiff hi
taken away. The jury again retir'
and did not come in until 6.05 o'cloc
when they returned verdict for
y plaintiff for cents and costs, 81
8 Court then adjourned until 10 o'clo
this morning.
II For cuts, bruises, sprains, burr
u scalds. frostbites and chilblains nothi
Iequals Salvation Oil. 1t annihila'
8 Ipain. Prize Is cents o bottle.
I'll --
II We are Offering at greatly reduc
Iprices all our stock of hollow wa