Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1894-04-12

tried or had sold to one Charles Houston n
drawing-knfe, in consideration for one
half gallon of wine.
The defendant testified that he attended
the snle aud bought three barrels in which,
among other things, he found the draw
ing-knfe, after taking the barrels to his
home and emptying them in the presence
of several witnesses. The defence also
proved the good reputation of the prisoner
IN the locality in which he lives
Alter the arguments of both sides were
heard Judge Marvel gave very impartial
charge to tho jury which, after remaining
out for quarter of an hour returned
verdict Of guilty. Kollock was sentenced
to pay iine Of 81, to be whipped with 10
lashos on Saturday next and TO remain in
prison for three months.
The libel suit of the State VS.. Samuel |.
Roop, editor of the Laurel Gazette, was con-
tinued till the October term of court on
the grounds that the prosecuting witness
Major Isaac J. Woottep, formerly of Laurel
but now of Nevada, was out Of the State
and that service could not be had upon
him. Charles Il. Richard is counsel for
the defendant
This ended the States work.
In every true bill that was found by the
grand inquest the defendant was convicted
or pleaded guilty, making a very clean
record for the attorney general.
The next case tried was q civil cause of
replevin Of Charles I. lsaacs VS.. George Ii.
Messick. X. Z. White was counsel for the
plaintiff and Q. w. Cullen represented the
defendant. The suit was for the recovery
of personal property sold on an execution
by constable which execution and I'D
vertisement is claimed to be irregular.
At Z o'clock court adjourned till this
morning.
For the first time in the history of the
courts of this county. this week n grand
jurors answered to the rull-call ard not
one of them wished to be excused, and the
Chief Justice was compelled to name one
OF the Jurors and excuse him from any
further attendance, in order for the grand
inquest to have an odd number SO that
they could get to work.
GEoRGErowY, April 9.-At Saturdays
session of court the case of Isaacs VS.. Mes
sick was resumed. Two or three witnesses
were called in rebuttal by the attorney for
| the plaintiff, anu after which there was q
hot discussion rs to point of law by
counsel on both sides, whether the con-
stables notice that was sent to the sheriff
| was fraud perpetrated on the part of the
execution creditor or not.
The notice in question differed from the
| ones posted in that the middle letter of the
defendant was not the same in both notices.
| The court admitted the notice in evidence
| jury and the latter, after deliberating half
an hour. returned verdict in favor of
Charles lsaacs, the plaintiff, for $3.50 and
costs.
This same case was tried last term of
court and the jury found verdict In favor
Of the plaintiff, but the court granted the
defence II new trial on the grounds that
the jury had made n miscalCulation in
ascertaining the amount of their verdict.
At . O'Clock the court adjourned till
Monday morning at ~ o'clock.
GEoRGETowN, April DIN court. this
morning, the replevin case of Representa-
tive Robert W. Dasey and John Layton,
trading under the firm name Dasey Il
Layton. vs.. Nathaniel Phillips and wife
was called. The suit was brought to re-
cover personal property, sold at Il con-
stables sale, covering which was u former
execution and levy.
After the plaintiff finished examining
their witnesses, Bacon and Richards, for
the defendant, asked the court to grant a
nonsuit on the ground that the plaintiff
had not shown that the articles mentioned
in the writ of replevin were the same that
were covered by the former execution and
levy. Messrs. Boyer and White. for the
plaintiff, said that they had proven that
the property mentioned in each writ or
levy, was identical.
On referring to the stenographer's re-
ports the court granted the nonsuit on the
above grounds.
The next case was replevin suit of
Benjamin Sosman vs.. Nathaniel Conoway,
constable of Seaford hundred. Woodburn
Martin represented the defendant and II,
c. White was counsel for the plaintiff
After the evidence OF both sides had closed
Mr.. White asked the court for u nonsuit
on the grounds that hedefence in his pleas
which were general had proven general
property but had failed to prove specific
property in the particular goods mentioned
in the writ of replevin.
The motion was not granted. the court
holding that sufficient proof was ad-
duced on the part of the defence to prove
a specific property in some of the articles
mentioned in The levy if not all.
Chief Justice Lore charged the jury, and
after remaining out for about four hours
the jury returned verdict of six cents for
the plaintiff.
The next case was that of Samuel w.
Darby of Frederick. Kent county, VS..
Henry =. Watson of near Milford. MIR.
Cullen represented the plaintiff and
Nessrs. Causey and Cahall the defendant.
1t was an action of assumpsit TO recover
the balance due on negotiable note given
by the defendant to the plaintiff for 1894,
in payment for pair Of mules The de-
PENDANT claimed that he was to pay for the
mules by delivering pine piling to the
plaintiff, and when sufficient piling was
delivered the note was to be given up.
The plaintiff would not accept the piling
when delivered.
AT this period court adjourned till to-
morrow morning at 10 o'clock.