The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1885-11-13

VIM. Gilbert, John A. G. Galley,
Edmund Mitchell, James Hollis
Geo. ii. Osthme, Alex. Keenan,,
John IL. Preston, VIM D. Osborn,
Robert II. Smith, Josiah Scarborough
Hargraves Spalding, Alphonso NJ. SwartZ
| Mahlon Thompson.
Judge Waters in his charge to the Grand
Jury said in substance:
Your duties are more clearly and concisely
set forth in the oath you have just taken than
| could be done by any words of mine. If you
| should happen to be in doubt as to your duty,
| refer to the form of that oath for guidance
Envy, hatred, malice and ill-wil, as well as love-
fear, favor and affection, or any hope or promise
OF reward, have no place in the Grand Jury room.
| In your present service you represent the State
| OF Maryland. and must lay aside all personal
| feelings and considerations. You are not to try
eases-that is the province of the petit jury
| Your duty Is to examine the evidence on the
part of the State and determine whether it ia such
as to require the party accused to be called on
for his defence. If the evidence before you,
Wamd Jdcte case-in other words, if it shows the
| commission of a crime and points to the perpe-
traitor Of the crime, then it is your duty to make
| apresentment, but not otherwise. lido not know
of any occasion for calling your attention to any
particular violations of the law, unless, possibly
| there may be one exception. In reference to
what is known as the Local Option Law" and
| the duties of courts and juries in respect to ii
tnere seems to be some misapprehension in the
| of this Grand Jury. The local option law is upon
our statute books. 1t has been sustained in every
|
| Appeals. 1t is your duty and mine, under our
oaths, to enforce it just as every other law is
forced; no more and no less. There is, unques-
| tionably, general impression that this law ia
| being violated in different parts of the county,
and more than that. public opinion points to GER
tain individuals as habitual violators of this law
| Vigilance committees may act upon such evil
| dence, may assume as true what is generally be-
lieved courts of justice can not and must not
| You cannot frame an Indictment against man
| for being notorious vioator of this or any other
law. You must charge and prove some specific
act, the commission of which constitutes the yio-
lation of the law. Every violation of law con-
sists in the commission of some specific act
which act furnishes the grounds for an indict-
ment. and, when properly charged and proved
| beyond reasonable doubt, ought to be followed
| by a conviction and punishment. We have no
| other means of enforcing any criminal law
w nat Is notorious may or may not be true, but
we have to do only with what Is proved By credidLe
testimony deHrered ander oath. In this in every
| other matter touching your present service your
Official oath must be your guide and limit"
The following cases were transferred to the
stet docket:
Goldsmith u Gill VS.. George Airey. Lee for
plaintiff.
j. Haines Mccullough VS.. Garrett GALLON.
VIM. Young for plaintiff.
-, VIM: Dixon y Bro: VS.. Billingslea u Co.
| WIN. Young and Maynadier for plaintiffs, Far
nandis, II. w. Archer and Stump for defend.
| ants.
Harrison Hopper vs. Skipwith II. CoaIe.-
Archer Il VanBibibber and Stump for plaintiff,
| IlCc uuu WIN 1Oullp LOT OeIcDQantS.
| Chas. Newman VS.. Martha Shane Archer
" VanBibber for plaintiff, VIM. Young for de-
| fendant.
John II. Spencer VS.. James T. Knight
Archer u VanBibber for plaintiff, Farnandis
and VIM. Young for defendant.
Luther NJ. Gorsuch vs. Sarah M. Good
Archer IL VanBibber for plaintiff
State, use of VIM. Young, VS.. Jacob Osmond.
Young for plaintiff, Hopkins for defendant.
State use of W. j. Fulton and wife, VS.. Geo.
| NJ. Michael and Garrett Osborn Archer and
| VunBi bier for plaintiff.
Jane Prigg VS.. Jas. l.. Bowman. VIM. and
John s. Young for plaintiff, Archer and Van.
| Bbber for defendant.
L. c. Makinson VS.. David Mckee h Bro
VIM. Young for plaintiff, Maynadier for de.
| PENDANTS.
Goldsborough, Meyer 81 Pitts VS.. Frances
Sweet Archer " VanBibber for plaintiffs.
| A. NJ. Hancock, guardian, vs. Charles o.
Blackburn. VIM. Young for plaintiff Magma.
dier for defendant.
| Chas. o. Blackburn vs. A. NJ. Hancock
Same counsel.
Moses Fox, VS.. E. w. Gallup. VIM. Young
for plaintiff, John s. Young for defendant.
ID. NJ. Osborn Il Co. VS.. Thomas Norris
Lee for plaintiffs, VIM. Young for defendant.
A: NJ. Hancock VS.. Z. W. Harvard. VIM.
Young for plaintiff, Harlan 81 Webster for de.
| PENDANT.
A. Schultz u Co. vs.. N. W. s. Hays. viii.
liams for plaintiffs
Harlan " Webster, trustees, VS.. same. Har-
! Ian u Webster for plaintiffs, VanBibber for
| defendant.
c. Aultman Il Co. VS.. Dennis Hines and VIM.
E. Stewart Stump for plaintiffs, Archer &
VanBibber for defendants.
j. c. Barkley q Co. vs. Thos. H. C. Reed
| Williams for plaintiffs.
Judgments were entered in the following
| cases
John s. Young VS.. s. E. Morrison. VIM.
Young for plaintiff, Stump for defendant.
| Ellen Keaveney, adm'x VS.. Lee u Bro, Ar
cher u VanBibber for plaintiff, VIM. Young
| for defendants
! Empire Drill Co. VS.. VIM. c. Sheridan. Stump
I for plaintiff VIM. Young for defendant
| Jas Hand VS. Mayor and CITY Council of Hayre
Archer, DR., for plaintiff, Marine for defendant.
| Waring Fertilizer Co. vs.. VIM. G. Roberts ;
off. Williams for plaintiff.
John IL. Emmord VS. John ii Bradfield. Har-
Ian 81 Webster for plaintiff, Robinson for de-
| PENDANT.
John II. Haines VS.. Harrison Hopper; removed
! to Baltimore county. VIM. Young and Archer
u Van Bibber for plaintiff, II. W. Archer and
| Marine for defendant.
| Adams & Gilbert VS.. Charles H. Price, Gill
| bert for plaintiffs.
Susquehanna Fertilizer Co. vs.. E. G. Hopkins
VIM: Young for plaintiff, Archer Il Van Bibber
| for defendant
David c. Ely VS.. E. A. Bagley; judgment
| IN favor OF plalntlH lOr SlSU.of. WllllamS Tor
| plaintiff.
VIM. II. Harlan, trustee, VS.. &. c. Martini
| Harlan u Webster for plaintiff.
| Same VS.. G. 2. Mitchell. Same counsel.
VIM. b. Hitchcock VS.. Harrison Hopper re-
moved to Baltimore county. Archer d Van
Bbber for plaintiff, II. w. Archer and Marine
| for defendant.
Joseph Livezey vs.. Jacob Livezey, DR., execu-
tori agreed. Lee for plaintiff, Robinson for de-
| fendant
Jno. q. A. McConkey VS.. w. Scott Whiteford
| Lee for plaintiff. Archer d Van Bibber for de-
| PENDANT.
Secher Il Co. VS.. Emmord IL Taylor. Lee for
plaintiffs, Stump and Archer u Van Bibber
| for defendants.
| Janney u Andrews vs.. same. Lee for plain
| tiffs, Archer Il Van Bibber for defendants.
Susquehanna Fertilizer Co. VS.. W. r. u A. F.
Galbreath VIM. Young for plaintiff, Harlan &
| Webster for defendants.
| Same VS.. A. j. Famous Same counsel.
Same vs.. Joseph Ross 81 Son. Young for
plaintiff, Hopkins for defendants
John W. Billingslea vs.. 8. p. Minnick agreed.
Lee for plaintiff, Archer " Van Bibber for de-
| PENDANT.
Alice A. McKendless vs. Jacob z. and j. R.
! Walker (oOlpv far plaintiR Stnnn for do