Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1897-02-25
A BEER CASE.

A case OF Mack VS.. The State, though
there can be no local interest in the plaintiff,
yet the case is of general effect Mack was
sentenced for selling beer from a Wagon, the
the indictment on which he was convicted
being based upon supplement- to an act
entitled, "An act concerning inns and
taverns." General statutes, page 1895. This
supplement makes it misdemeanor to sell
any intoxicating liquor from any "ambula-
tory conveyance" This supplement is held
to be unconstitutional, and its object is in
no way expressed in the title of the act to
which it is supplement.
At Camden last Saturday morning Judge
Miller set aside the judgment in the Glou-
cester County Circuit Court in favor OF
Mary Black VS.. Edward FL. Black, her hus-
band. The Swedeshoro National Bank
held judgment against Edward II. Black
and David O. Watkins, Esq., their attorney
contended that a wife could not hold a
judgment at law against her husband based
upon contract made between them during
marriage, which view the Court sustained.
The decision Of Chancellor McGill, in
which he adiudges John D. Shute, OF
Glassboro, guilty OF contempt of Court for
his refusal to obey an order of the Court OF
Chancery, restraining him from selling GER
tain property in this county and imposing
a fine of $40 and costs. The case was one
in which Mr.. Shute was executor of the
estate of George Bender, whose property, al
his death, reverted to his wife, and at her
death reverted to two young ladies, grsnd-
children of the deceased. The heirs last
month interviewed Trustee Shute and were
amazed when he informed them that he
proposed selling the property, and had
advertised it at public sale. Upon learning
the situation of affairs, the two young
women consulted counsel, and an effort was
made to have Mr.. Shute adjourn the sale
in order that an opportunity might be
given the persons interested to make an ex-
animation OF the matters concerning the
sale, and determine whether they desired
the farm sold or preferred to keep it. Mr..
Shute, it is alleged, declined repeatedly to
delay the sale in any way, and thereupon
counsel for the heirs informed him that
they objected to the sale, and preferred to
retain the farm, and directed him not to
make the sale, as he had advertised.
Mr. Shute having refused to make any
concessions in the matter of the sale, an ap-
plication was made in the Court of Chan
Gerry, of New Jersey, for an INDUCTION to
prevent Shute from carrying out his de-
signs. An order was made by the Court
restraining Mr. Shute from making the sale
when advertised, and requiring him to
show cause before the Court at future day
why he should not be prevented from dis
posing of the farm against the wishes OF
the heirs. This restraining order was OBJ
tanned the morning the sale was advertised
to take place and promptly served on the
executor, who, however, proceeded with
the sale.
When the matter came on to be heard by
the Court, the counsel for the heirs applied
to the Chancellor for an order to punish
Shute for his contempt in disobeying the
injunction served upon him. This matter
was argued, and finally. few days ago,
the Chancellor made an order adjudging
Shute guilty of contempt of the Court OF
and providing that he should pay
to the State fine of $40, together with
costs of the compliments, and that if he
failed to make this payment within ten
days he should be committed to one of the
county jails until he should comply with
the order of the Court The Chancellor in
disposing Of the case said that the conduct
of Mr. Shute was very arbitrary, and that
would be necessary TO punish him in
order to yindicate the majesty of the law.
Public Ledger.