Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1895-11-21


the Charles Warner Co., continued
from the February term Of 1894, Judge
j. Frank Ball for the plaintiff and Ben
iamin Nields for the defendant. Ellen
N. Satterfield, vs. William II. Craw-
ford, continued from the November
term Of 1894, j. II. Biggs for the
plaintiff and William I. Lyman for the
defendant; Elsie II. Satterfeld VS.. vii
liam ii. Crawford, j. #. Biggs for the
plaintiff and William I. Lyman for the
defendant; William @. Loeher Va. the
Wilmington City Railway Co., Levi G.
Bird for the plaintiff and Willard
Salisbury for the defendants Miles Il.
Gillen vs.. the Mayor and City Council
of Wilmington, Levi g. Bird and Will
lard Salisbury for the plaintiff and
City Solicitor Hartman for the defend
ant; William Davidson vs. William
Forests administrator, William s.
Hilles Tor the plaintiff and Samuel W.
McCaulley for the defendant: Mary
O'Neill's administrator We. the B. & z.
Railroad Co.., L. G. Vandegr IT and
William S. Hilles for the plaintiff and
Levi q. Bird for the defendant; George
Maui VS., Frank Duggan, ct al, CON
tinued from the February term uf 1895,
Artemus Smith for the plaintiff and
Martin b. Burris for the defendant ;
John b. Gould ct al, vs. Delaware
Lyman, j. +. Biegs for the plaintiff
and William It, Lyman for the defend
ant; George w. Skaggs VS.. the p, w.
Il B. Railroad Co., j. f. Biggs and p,
L. Cooper for the plaintiff and Senator
Gray for the defendant; George @.
Marshall VS.. the Mutual Life 1nsur-
ance Co., j. Ii. Rodney and Josiah
Marvel for the plaintiff and j. III.
Whiteman for the defendants John H.
Pierce We. the Wilmington City Rail
way Co., Levi G. Bird for the plaintiff
and Willard Salisbury for the defend
ant; William r. Stewart vs.. the jack
son & Sharp Co., Levi @. Bird for the
plaintiff and George II. Bates for the
defendants Clayton j. Dresh vs.. the
Wilmington City Railway Co., Levi q.
Bird and William s. Hilles for the
plaintiff and Willard Salisbury for the
defendant; Arabella Rodgers VS.. Bar
low g. Weer. William S. Hilles for the
plaintiff and Willard Hall Porter for
the defendant; Abram r. Frantz, d.
b. a., VS.. j. II. Hoffecker, OF al, p.
b. r., Philip z. Churchman for the
plaintiff and William S. Hilles for the
defendant; Abram Z. Frantz, d. b. a. +,
vs.. Elizabeth Hoffecker, D. b. H.,
Philip @. Churchman for the plaintiff
and William S. Hilles for the defend
ant; David Carrick Il Co., Vs.
Alvin r. Morrison, G. L. Ward for the
plaintiff and p l.. Cooper for the de.
PENDANT; Humphrey M. Moran IS.
Roberts e Andrews, Thomas F. Bayard,
Jr.. for the plaintiff and II. II. Ward
for the defendant; the National Bank
of Wilmington and Brandywine VIZ.
Liverpool, London and Globe Insur-
ance Co., continued froll the February
term of 1885; j. f. Biggs for the
plaintiff; the National Bank of Will.
mington and Brandywine VS.. Royal In
surance Co., garnishee, J. +. Biggs for
the plaintiff; Tobias b. Merritt vs.. the
Wilmington Abattoir and Cold Storage
Co., Tilghman johnson for the plaintiff
and Hoffecker & Hoffecker for the de-
PENDANT; Amelia A. Donovan d. b. a.
VS.. II. b. Alexander & Son, p. b. II,
continued from the May term of 1895,
appeal, Hartman g. Knowles for the
plaintiff and Li!burn Chandler for the
defendant; John w. Wright Va. the
Wilmington City Railway Co., Artemus
Smith and P. L. Cooper. Jr., for the
plaintiff and Willard Salisbury for the
defendant; John T. Reed VS.. John @.
Daniels and Stokeley Daniels, NJ. b.
Burris for the plaintiff and Harry
Emmons for the defendant; Eliza
Sharpley's administrator VS.. Jacob
Sharpley's executor, continued from
the May term of 1895, Samuel McCaul-
ley for the plaintiff and Senator Gray
for the defendant; Frank E. Griswold
vs.. the p, W. & B. Railroad Co., J.
F. Biggs for the plaintiff and Senator
Gray for the defendant; George A.
Daniels VS.. the Liebig Manufacturing
Co., J. f. Biggs for the plaintiff and
Bradford, Vandegrift Il Byrne for the
defendant; James n. Crawford VS..
Frelingheysen H. Clothier, M. B.
Burris and j. F. Biggs for the plaintiff
and H. II. Ward for the defendant;
James L. Crawford vs.. William r. L.
Tatman, continued from the May term
of 1895, M. b. Burris and j. #. Biggs
for the plaintiff and II. ii. Ward for the
defendants James N. Crawford vs. Pur-
nal J. Lynch, NJ. B. Burris and ]. f.
Biggs for the plaintiff and II. H. Ward
for the defendant; Luther W.. Ewing ct
al, VS.. the Mayor and City Council of
Wilmington, continued from the May
term of 1895, Lilburn Chandler for the
plaintiff and City Solicitor Hartman for
the defendant; Horace p. Adams VS..
the Wilmington City Railway Co., con-
tinued from the May term of 1895,
Walter II. Hayes for the plaintiff and
Willard Salisbury for the defendant.
Several cases were reported settled
and number of contipuances were
asked for. Tbs court announced that
the list would be taken up next
Monday morning, when the cases will
he put on the calendar, and that at
that time all special juries desired
must DO asked for.
The following divorce cases are on
the argument list: Thomas II. VS..
Caroline Cornell, William L. VS.
Maggie L. Booker, Louisa W. Va. Will
liam II. Thomas, w. j. vs.. Emma
Springbitt, Samuel G. vs.. Florence N.
Fisher, Isaac @. vs.. Annie M. Haines.
Rnsalie b. VS.. J. Edward Addicks,
Annie B. VS.. George Bockius, Emaline
vs.. George Taylor, Margaret s. VS..
Zaehariah g. Dennis, Mary Emma VS..
Benjamin f. jackson, Margaret VS..
John ID. Walker, Clara @. VS.. Howard
Griffiths. Most of these cases are old
ones which have been continued.
Immediately after the court had
finished with the trial list Josiah Mar
vel, counsel for Kate Wolf, the woman
against whom there are three charges
of larceny, asked for continuance
until this afternoon, in order TO allow
of the attendance of witnesses who are
out of the city. The request was
granted.
Charles Lewis. colored, was arraigned
on the charge of stealing a razor from
Jacob Austin, also colored, in South
Wilmington. After Austin testified,