Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1891-03-05


also presented a petition signed by the
officers of the court, the members of the
levy court and a number Of the members
of the bar, asking that the application
be granted.
1t was again opposed by Mr. Pricllett,
on the ground that it was new place
and not needed. He also contendcd
that if the application was granted, the
manufacturers in the vicinity, who have
millions of dollars invested in their
business, would be the sufferers.
Bernard Cars case came up next.
His place is at No. sos Church street
and he was turned down some time ago
for violating the law, in selling to
minors, and committing an assault on
man. He was fined in the municipal
court for both of these charges and the
facts in both cases were brought out by
Mr.. Prckett, in his argument again5t
the application.
H. @. Turner represented Carr, and
presented petition from persons resid-
ing in the vicinity asking that the appli-
cation should be granted. He also
called Samuel r. Dunlap, Robert Dun
lap, Major Smith, Officer William Floyd
and Dennis Mccormack, each of whom
tGSlllCN tlldl dtllilsS bhV lllhb Sull lluNi q
license he kept an orderly place, and
obeyed the law in every respect
As there was nothing against the fol-
lowing they We're passed and will get
their licenses: Pauline Ashcnback, No
207 West Second street; Edward Il. Car
son, northeast corner of Front and
Washington streets; James Deerey,
southwest corner of Seventh avenue
northwest corner Of Fourth and French
streets; John M. Crop, No. 105 Market
street; Patrick Haggerty, No. Sol West
Front street; John j. Mullin, southwest
corner of Sixth and Shipley streets;
Michael Mccarthy, No. 106 Market
street; Thomas McGillin, northwest
corner of Sixth and Madison streets;
L. Fred Ortlip, No. COS French street;
Philip Plunket, No. 200 West Front
street; Mary A. Reynolds, northwest
corner of Water and King streets;
Charles G.. Rex, No. 8 East Second
street; Joseph G. Goodwin and James
Ternan, New Castle.
At 4.25 O'Clock court adjourned until
10 Saturday morning.
When court convened at 10 o'clock
on Saturday, argument was heard in
the case of William Candy VS.. the ]. l..
Cooper Manufacturing Company. Mr..
Candy is the surviving trustee of the
company and this suit is brought to OBJ
tain judgment for $4,000 on mort
gage.
The company was represented by T..
G.. Bradford, Esq, and Mr.. Candy by
George II. Bates, Esq, who appeared in
court for the first time since his recent
severe and prolonged illness. Mr., Brad
ford made the opening argument, on be-
half of the company, in which he
claimed that no one was entitled to re-
cover except the bondholders.
Mr.. Bates argued for some time in
favor Of granting the application for a
Judgment in favor Of Mr.. Candy, for
the full amount of the claim, SO that he
would be able to sell the property of the
company.
The closing argument was made by
Mr.. Bradford, who argued that as each
of the bonds represented loan of $500,
at per cent interest, if there was any
thing to be realized by the sale of the
property, they should be the ones bene-
flied. The court announced that decision
would be given before the close of the
term.
The license applications were then re-
sumed, and the case of George M. Ben
nett of Marshallton taken up. Mr..
Prickett presented several circumstances
against granting the license, as, in the
opinion of the signers, the place was not
needed and would be an injury to the
place.
N. V. Chambers, Willard Gregg, Isaac
Ienderman. John II. Crouch. c. G.
Jones, John McCullin and w. j. Rob
inson each testified that they had signed
this application, but are not freeholders.
John Mccall, who also signed, said
that he is freeholder, but when closely
questioned by Mr.. Prckett, said that
his freehold consisted of lot in the
burial ground at Newport.
The applicant was represented by
| II. G. Turner, ESQ.,, who, after hearing
| the testimony, said that as he was salts
fed the required number of freeholders
had not signed the application he would
| withdraw it.
The next case considered was that OF
| Patrick Mulrooney of Chestnut and
| Van Buren, streets, whose application
was refused at the last term of court.
Chief Justice Comegys said that as il
had been refused it devolved on Levi G.
Bird and A, b. Cooper, Esqs., attorneys
for the applicant, to show that circum-
stances are different now to what they
We're at that time.
Mr.. Cooper made an appeal in behalf
of the applicant, and presented petitions
in his favor, signed by almost ali the 300
tax payers of the Tenth ward.
Thomas Manion, Milo Burke, James
| TT Ip1l1ipp Michael INnr1a1y n,,J Iat,,
| r. Leonard, each testified that during
the time Mulrooney had license he
kept d quiet, orderly house and obeyed
the law. As Mr.. Prickett's witnesses
were not present, the further considers
| ton Of the case was postponed until
| Monday.
The case of Michael McGillin, who
| applies for wholesale license to sell
liquor at the southwest corner of
| Fourth and Scott streets, was the next
taken up. He was represented by j.
Frank Biggs, ESQ.,, who presented sew
eral letters and petitions in favor of
granting the application, and called
John j. Gallagher and James Rogers,
who testified that place of the kind
was needed in the neighborhood, and
that the applicant was a proper man to
keep it.
Mr.. Prickett opposed the application,
and claimed there was no necessity for
it. The case of Elan Page of Port
Penn, was next considered. II. G. Tur-
ner, ESQ, who appeared for the appli-
cant, called Samuel Renshaw and
William Miller, residents of Port Penn,
to show that the place was needed.
At o'clock court took recess until
$50 o'clock in the afternoon.
The session of court held on Saturday
afternoon mns cnnsll1nnd in hnar RIM ~ q