The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1897-12-31

several NtyS ago ana removed all lue
stock fro mthe store, Because of the
assignment they will probably have to
return the goods. Mills owes about
$1,000, His assets are worth about $500
HAS RETURNED TO WORK.
Arthur l., Hubbard, the young man
arrested few days ago for robblng the
Eastern News company, by which he
was employed as clerk at its news stand
in the Union depot, is back at his work,
His employers have decided to give him
a chance, and have confidence that he
will make good the amounts he stole,
In the city court this morning he will
plead guilty to the charge of embezzle-
ment, and the state Will accept his
proposition to settle his case by pay
ment Of fine Although Hubbard, by
his own admission, embezzled large
sum of money, he is charged with TAX
ing only So
THE ARSON CASES.
There was nothing in the movements
of the police detectives yesterday which
would indicate that there would be any
more arrests in the Tontine incendiary
cases. 1t had been rumored that there
was another person who was involved
in the alleged conspiracy and that this
party might be arrested also. City At
torney Brown said, however, that no
more arrests would be made.
SHORT CALENDAR CASES.
In the court of common pleas the fol-
lowing cases have been claimed for the
short calendar for hearing to-day;
Richard c. Lowe ct al. VS. Chaje
Runes; motion for decree of foreclosure
and limitation of time for redemption.
The City of Ansonia VS.. Mary J.
Conklin ct al; demurrer.
Charles Frazier s. Co, VS.. Gustave
Bolze; demurrer to answer.
Julius H. Frost VS., w. W. Cameron;
motion to strike from the docket.
James w. Clifford & Co. vs.. the z. S.
Wheeler company; demurrer to COM
plant.
The E. H. Darlington company VS..
Edgar H. Jones ct al; motion for leave
to withdraw demurrer and file an an
SWer.
Terrence p. Smith VS.. Henry Sulz-
man; motion for order that defendant
plead further
Abram Shilnitz VS.. George r. &
George l.. Burton; motion for bond to
prosecute.
Annie E. Leach VS.. R. e. Harris; mo-
ton for default for failure to file an
swer.
Seaman B. Smith VS.. Lucius B. Hin
man; motion for non-suit for failure to
comply with the orders of court.
Nathan Cohn VS. the Elm City Man
ufacturing company ct al; motion to
set aside non-suit.
Henry A. Whiting VS.. H. c. NJ Keep
Ike; motion for decree of foreclosure and
limitation of time for redemption.
Cornelia Bradley VS.. William It.
Jones: motion for Judgment of fore
closure
c. Cowles & Co. vs. the Audubon
Wagon company; motion to strike out
part of paragraph 9 of plea to jurisdic-
ton; motion for Judgment of non-com-
pliance. '.'
James Adair VS.. L. A. Koon ct al. !;
judgment for failure to comply with or
der of court.
Schmidt e. Schwanenfugel VS.. Dennis
Toohill; motion for judgment for fail
| ure to comply with order of court; de-
| murrer. 8B
| Same VS.. John u Cogglns; motion for
| judgment for failure to comply with
| order of court; demurrer.
Mary ]. Hogben VS.. the John Han
cock Mutual Life Insurance company;
| default for failure to file answer.
| Essex E. Spencer VS.. Ellsworth B.
| Maltby; motion for default for non
| compliance with order.
| Fitzgerald & Bradley VS.. John ]. Ho-
gan; bond for prosecution.
| c. Cowles 81 Co VS.. the Audubon
Wagon company; demurrer on motion
| de plaintiffs reply.
| Perl S. Smith ct TX VS.. Karni Gins
berg ct Tx; motion for bond.
Walter S. Jones VS.. Christian STREET.;
bond for prosecution.
| Frank S. Bishop VS.. Robert H. Denny
| ct al judgment of foreclosures; also
| motion for an order Of eiectment.
James Lord VS.. Isaac Katz; motion
for default for failure to comply with
the order Of court.