The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1893-06-14


Yesterday Afterpoon's Court.
Court resumed at $50 O'Clock yee.
terday afternoon. with all the Judges
present. William Michael Byrne cali
led the attention OF the court to the
case Of Manuel Richenberger, vs.. Der.
nard ]. McVey. He said this was q
bet. In which Richenberger lost, and
then entered suit against State Detec.
tive Money, the stakeholder, to re-
cover S35. the amout of the bet. Rich
enberger was represented by William
Il. Lyman. The case was heard before
Squire Sasse, who decided In favor Of
Rtchenberger. and the squire refused
to allow an appeal The court after
hearing argument reserved deci-
sion.
Henry G. Turner filed his return as
commissioner In the divorce case of
Phyllis Gross, vs. John W. Gross,
which recommends the granting of q
the plaintiff. asked that publication be
made.
II. @. Turner called attsntion to the
cases OF saloon keepers O'Donnell,
Casey and Curren. who were tried be.
fore Judge Ball and ordered to each
pay fine for violating the liquor law.
MIR. Turner. who represented them,
took the cases to the Superior Court
on writs of certiorari, to test the juris-
diction of the Municipal Court In cases
OF licensed liquor dealers. After ar
gument had been heard, the Court de-
cided that the Municipal Court has no
jurisdiction In such cases, and now
Mr.. Turner wanted to know whether
the city, county or State must pay the
costs.
The Court, after consultation, decid.
cd that the county must pay the costs,
and directed that the bill should be-
sent to the Levy Court.
Cyrus Castle, X. G. E., George 8. Ca.
Senator John Pyle. The other referees,
are Joseph L. Carpenter, Sr., and
Thomas Darlington. The agreement
WAS that the referees should not bel
members Of any secret society. Sena-
tor Pyle who was named as refereeI
does belong to lodges, and the chanReI
was made. Rutter was member of
Cyrus Castle, and was sick for long
time. The Castle paid him benefits
for some time, and then, on the &C.
commentator OF the relief committee
who suspictoned that he waa feigning|
sickness, declined to pay him any
more benefits. Rutter appealed to the
Grand Castle which decided In hieI
favor, and ordered Cyrus to pay himl
the amount due, which they declined
to do. The Castle was then suspended,
and the charter revoked, but the mat
ter will be taken to the Supreme Csstle.
In the meantime Rutter entered suit
settle the case by referees.
Harry I'm mnna ranraaanfInn Gan
A. Hopes, shoe dealer at No. z East
Third street. argued before the court
on the n0n.service of writ upon his
client. Judgment had been entered
on Hopes stock and execution wa 81
ordered. He secured special bail. A.
writ was Issued for his attendance at
court. but 1t was returned non est and
"a writ was then Issued against the
special bail. Mr.. Emmons asked to-
have the last proceeding set aside be-
cause Of false return In the first pro-
ceeding. He claimed that Hopes
could have been found any day at his
place Of business, and that the writ
Tor his attendance at court was never
served. Sheriff Gould testified that
he had never seen the writ, and Deputy
Issued the writ. and upon being told
turned IL non est.
Mr.. Emmons insinuated that there
was some trickery about the proceed
ings, and this was resented by John
II. Rodney. who represented the oppo-
sition. Hopes was in court along
side OF MIR. Emmons, and Mr.. Rodney
said that all Mr.. Emmons had to do
was to surrender his client and this
would clear the special bail. This Mr..
|Emmons declined to do, and said that
Mr.. Rodney could have him arrested
III he wished. The court held the mat
ter under consideration.
Mr.. Nields asked for rule to show
cause why new trial should not be
granted in the case of Sewell vs.. pur-
nelPs executors, and the rule was made
returnable on Thursday afternoon.
In the case of Henry Ii. Martin, col
ored. Va. Henry Snyder. which was de-
cided at the morning session by award
ing the plaintiff $3.50 on account OIL
the non-appearanoe Of the defendant,
an affidavit was presented by Snyder'sl
attorney. stating that he was not
aware that the case would be taken up,
at this term; that he had called on the
|prothonotary and he told him that IL
he was wanted he would be notified;
that he had never received any notice,
and therefore asked that the verdict
against him be set aside and the case
re-hesrd. A rule was granted and
made retnrnable tomorrow afternoon.