The Cambria freeman. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1867-1938, 1893-03-17

Sentenced 10 pay fine of 200 and costs
Commonwealth vs.. Charles II. Supers,
cruelty TO animals Grand jury ignored
the bill.
Commonwealth vs. George Wells, as
sault ana battery. Continued.
Commonwealth vs.. Samuel March,
larceny. Continued.
| In the case of the Commonwealth vs.
Chas f. Beclley, embeZzlement, and Com
monU ealth vs.. y. j. Watt, same charge,
,lOUc proSeqnies were entered.
Commonwealth vs.. Ellen Seely, larceny.
Continued.
Comm onwealth vs.. Edward Hughs,
Patrick Doyle. Edward Murphey and
Charles Davis, rape. Continued.
Commonwealth vs.. Andrew Dubowsky,
! defrauding a boarding-houSe keeper
| Defendant plead guilty. Sentence To pay
fine of 81, costs and go to jail 10 days
| Commonwealth vs.. ErastuS Wagner,
rape. Jury find defandanJ guilty.
J Commonwealth vs.. Henry MaeSer.
| false pretence Jury find not guilty, and
prosecutor. B. F. Stull, TO pay the costs.
Commonwealth VS.. Benjamin Figart,
cruelty to animals. Jury find defendant
! not guilty.
| A n0Uc proscq,i was entered in the case
! charged with embnZzement. the costs be-
| ing paid by the prosecutor.
Commonwealth vs.. John Byrne. fur
nishing liquor to minors. Defendant en-
tered into recognizancc in the sum of 500
| for his appear ance at argument court.
Commonwealth vS. VIM. +. Cock, en-
bezzlement Jury find defendant guilty.
Commonwealth W.. Clarence Otto.
| I'm nd
not guilty.
Commonwealth vs.. Daniel 4. Miller,
ASSAULT and battery. Jury find defendant
not guilty but divided costs between the
defendant and prosecutor.
Commonwealth vs.. James Grumley,
enlightenment. Jury find defen dant guilty.
SECOND WEEK.
The following sentences We're imposed
upon prisoners convicted last week:
Emanuel Wagner, convicted of rape. was
sentenced to pay fine of $50 and go To Jail
nine months.
George GarriS, convicted OF larceny, was
sentenced To pay Il fine of so and costs, and
undergo an Imprisonment in the Western
pcnitentiary for one year and six months.
Harry Goodman ard Joseph Myers, con-
ctcd of robbery. were sentenced To the
Huntingdon reformatory.
Harry +. Hill, convicted of felonious as
,ault and battery, was sentenced To pay a
fine of SO and costs and go to Jail for three
months.
John c. Peterson, who pleaded guilty To
the charge of embcZz!ement, but for whom
clemcncy was asked by both prosecutor in
the case and the district attOrney-Peter
son having returned part of the menry
/ 1. .;,,.
was simply sentenced To pay the costs.
Robert McGoniglc. a boy IG years of age,
who pleaded guilty 10 stealing whiskey
from the railroad station AT Lilly, was sen
fenced to pay a fine Of -, the costs of
prosecution, and to spend three months in
the county jail.
McGouigle ". Piper. Settled.
Pindle ". Cambria Land Co. Continued
until second Monday in May, when spe-
cal term of court will be held
The following cases were continued:
O'Hara vs.. Hays. Gill vs.. JohnStown Lum-
Der Company. Esther James V. William
Lluvd, Shirley v. Mt Oliver Baptist
church, of Johnstown, Love, Sunshine "
Co. ". WillettS Il Harrington, Alex. Mock
vs.. John Fuller. Valley Pike Co. vs.. heirs
of John b. Hay.
The two cases of James 5. Bracken
against Frank Stern were then called, but
the plaintiff was not ready to proceed and
a non suit was taken.
+. ID. Saupp vs.. Alfred Jordan, feigned
issue. was next taken up and a jury en-
panelcd, but was afterwards settled
The case of =. +. Shafier vs.. a. +. Stutz-
man and Rachael Hays was a feigned is
sue 10 decide the question of ownership of
certain personal property which had been
levied on by the sheriff. at suit of Stutz-
man and Mrs. Hayey, as belonging to
Peter Rhodes, dairyman, who lives on
ShafTer'S farm in East Taylor township.
Shafrer claimed that he had bought the
property in dispute on December %. 1Sg2.
Jury decided in favor of the plaintiff.
The case of Joseph Sloan vs.. Mrs. Will
liam Beestine in which plaintiff claimed
money due him for building a foundation
for house, was taken up, but the plaintiff
not appearing, a verdict was given TO de-
fendant.
Charles Zimmerman vs.. George w.
Dibert, of JohnStown, was on trial when
court adjourned at noon. Mr.. Zimmerman
went on the stand and said that in Febru-
airy, 1891, he bargaincd with Mr.. Dibert
for a lot in the triangular strip at the
Junction of Morris and Somerset street
agreeing TO pay 5000 for il, and give SICO
cash down: that at the time of the bar
gain he was led 10 believe t1c lot was on
the alley; that he subsequently discovered
ii was not; that he offered Mr.. Dibert the
additional $500 for a deed for the alley
lot, which Mr.. Dirbcrt refused. Mr. Di-
rbert took the stand in contradiction, and
said the lot he had sold was not the one
Mr.. Zimmerman had in his mind The
jury rendered alverdict for the defend
ant.
In the case of =. Klincordlinger VS.
Mrs. Rose McGough, a suit to recover
S6I.ss for liquors sold to defendant, a
verdict was rendered for the plaintiff
In the case of Motley Il Harter VS..
John McMulen II Cort Calderwood. was
an action to recover $3.50 on a book a,-
count The defence was that McMullen
had raid the account. The jury fou nd
verdict for the plaintiff against Cord
Calderwood.
The cases of F. III. and H. II Benford vs..
f. A. Zimmerman TO recover 500
for the use Of a team and damages for
breaking. The defendants story was that
he Lired team from the plaintiffs TO go TO
Stoyestown; that on the journey an ac-
cident occurred and the vehicle was brOk-
en-; that while gowing down a hill the strap
OF the yoke broke and let the tongue drop,
the horses running off. upSetting the car
rlage, and throwing himself and family To
the ground. Mr.. Zimmerman claims that
the strap must have been broken, or else il
was rotten. and that the accident was not
caused 10y any negligence on his part.
The jury returned verdict for the de-
fendant.
Court adjourned at noon on Wednesday