The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1894-10-12
HEARD IN COURT.
Gambling implements Are Adjudged
Forfeited to the State.

RhhDiink implements selzeu from the
rooms OF James Il. Angel. A like judg-
ment was entered against instruments
seized from l.. B. Brown.
The case In progress before Mr.. Justice
Wilbur Today Is that of Congdon Ayls-
worth vs.. Morris Slender. IL n claimed
that the defendant made false representa-
tion as TO his business standing, upon
which the plaintiff gave him credit to the
amount OF sl56.y7.
A Smithheld dog fight Is the founda-
tlon OF suit brought by It. III. Adams vs..
III. 4. Pollard and now being tried In the
common pleas division before Judge Rog-
ers. Last November Pollard was an officer
in Smithiield and attended dog fight
held in an old school house. Later, he
claims that an agreement was entered
into between himself and the defendant,
another officer, that he should let the
defendant prosecute the cases against the
dog fighters ana spectators, while ne
would give information concerning the
persons at the fight. For this II is alleged
that Pollard was 20 give him half OF his
conviction fees which amounted 10 about
S135. This he never did, hence the suit.
Also before Mr.. Justice Rogers the case
OF II. r. Boomer vs.. j. III. Rowley * 20.
was heard. This IL an action upon the
Defendants promissory note, dated May
49, 1890, with interest at per cent.
In the case OF Elizabeth L. Jones vs..
William w. Rickard the jury brought in
verdict sustaining the Will OF Phoebe
Jones, deceased.
The following were heard in the appel
late division OF The Supreme Court:
80 (demurrer). Municipal Court Of the
City OF Providence vs.. Catherine A. Nc
Elroy. Continued.
1866 (equity). Charles Long ct al VS..
George Shaw. Assigned 10 Oct. IL.
1906 equity. Charles Long ct al. VS..
Joseph Davenport. Assigned to Oct. IL.
Tomorrow's calendar follows:
common Pleas Division-l
1887. Eliza w. Steere ct al. app. VS..
j. VI. Ripley and j. Harris for plaintiff;
h. G. Mowry and l.. Scott for intervenors.
1918. City OF Providence VS.. Commis-
sioners, in re Washington street. Attor-
neys-City solicitor for plaintiff; various
counsel for defendant.
6372 New England Butt Company VS..
ID. Russell Brown. Attorneys-R. W..
Burbank for plaintiff; Bassett & Mitchell
for defendant.
$50. Ira n. Goff & Co., VS.. Joseph w.
Carter ct ak. Attorney-R. w. Burbank
for plaintiff; A. 4. West ~ q. t. Brown
for defendant.
- Simon Barnard VS.. Charles Cohen.
Attorneys-C. Il. Parkhurst for plaintiff; I;
j. j. Ham for iefendant
- Edgar j. fucker va. George C.Kelly.
Attorneys-J. w. Mathewson for plain
tiff Edwards Il Angel for defendants.
1854. John Trainor VS.. William
wymsn. Attorneys-G. J. West for
plaintiff; ----- for defendant.
s1.&0s s John coobsaHy oRsy x; Nsrr:sag''tt j.
West for plaintiff; II. q. Mowry for de-
fendant.
116. G. f. Hoye VS.. Union Railroad
Company. Attorneys-G. j. West for
plaintiff; Bakers for defendant.
1l5. Francis Hsnley VS.. Union Railroad
company. Attorneys-Sam as in 116.
III. Lawrence Coyne VS.. Narragansett
West for PLAINTIFF; Bakers d r. q. Mowry
for defendant.
1T. Joseph Murphy vs.. Union Railroad
Company. Attorneys-G. j. West for
plaintiff; Bakers for defendant.
lis. Irving NJ. Williams VS. Union Rail-
road Company. Attorneys-Ssme as in
III.
59o2. Frank Armstrong VS.. Ambrose
Schaefer ct ux. Attorneys-G j. West for
plaintiff; Page & Owen for defendant.
1902. G. l.. Banding We. w. +. Sayles.
Attorneys-G. j. West for plaintiff; w.
w. and Il. w. Blodgett for defendant.
7l73. Jacob Finklestein vs. Moses
Frank. Attorneys--G. j. West for plain
tin; Cooke N Ang,ll for defendant.
no. Richard Welch Va. Edward #. Gla-
ser. Attorneys-Page & owen for plain
tiff; A. A. Baker for defendant.
800. Elisha +. White VS.. city of Provi-
dence. Attorneys Page q Owen for
plaintiffs city solicitor for defendant.
932. Ann Reilly vs.. City Of Providence.
Attorneys, same as 500.
$40. William II. Stevens ct ux. vs. Union
Railroad Company. Attorneys - Page *
Owen for plaintiffs Bakers for defendant.
119S. James Mulligan VS.. Union Rail-
road Company. Attorneys-Same as $40.
1191. John Aldrich VS.. Union Railroad
Company. Attorneys-Same as S76.
1900 NJ. w. Bainton, vs.. Union Rail-
road Company. Attorneys-Same as S76.
1911 Patrick j. Cannon, VS.. Union
Railroad Company. Attorneys - q. }.
West for plaintiff; Bakers for defendant.
7i9. Taylor Co. vs.. j. O'Sullivan, ct ux.
Attorneys ID. Bsssett and III. w.
Kimball for plaintiff; p. j. Mccarthy for
defendant
-. Pietro Palumbo VS.. Il. L. Thayer
Attorneys-H. A. McKeuney for plaintiff; ;
Smith and Greenough for defendant.
1905. Ray Artesisn Well and Machine
Company VS.. G.. A. Kay. Attorneys-J. j.
Hahn for plaintiff; Smith and Greenough
for defendant.
99l. j. A. Whaley w. NJ. A. Cairns. ct
al. Attorneys-A. NJ. Eaton and q. j..
West for plaintiff; ID. III. Sheahan for de-
fendant.
1903. Charles A. Ray VS.. Ray Artesian
Well and Machine Company. ATTORNEYS
Smith q Greenouyh for plaintiffs J. j.
Hahn for defendant.
-. James Corrigan VS.. John Il. GRAY.
Attorneys J. NJ. Brennan for plaintiff;
ID. Il. Potter for defendant.
Assigned Cases.
3i5. j. w. Brown VS.. Hapley, HOVE &
Co. ct al. Attorneys. l.. Goldsworthy
for plaintiff; &. G.. Farnsworth for de-
fendsnt.
1913. Burke Brothers We. Myer Poto-
sh.nsky. Attorneys-J. w. Hogan for
plaintiff; j. j. Hahn for defendant.
1858. Stone q Lovejoy VS.. JIG. Colburn.
Attorneys--W ilson &Jenckes for plaintiff. /.
Tanner & Cannon for defendant.
1853. Fiske x Levy vs.. w. W. Darcy.
Attorneys-Comstock ~ Gardner for
plsintiff; Tanner & Cannon for defend
ant.
tAppellate Division.l
2s03 fequity). William p. Carr ct al. vs..
Peter !. Quinn, guardian, 81 al. Attor-
novs-Samuol Norris and w. h. Barney