Evening journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1888-1932, 1898-11-22
CRIMINAL AND CIVIL.
County Courts Disposing Of
Business on Hand.
SOME PRISONERS SENTENCED

| N1AhthED tOh 1HlAL b1 lnth
SUPERIOR CoURT-oDDS AND
ENDS OF CRIMINAL WaRK.
Several cases were dlspose9 OF by the
Court of General Sessions yesterday
afternoon.
Alexander Finney was given ten
days for carrying concealed deadly
weapon.
William B. Sharp pleaded guilty 70
assault and battery and was sentenced
to thirty days Imprisonment. Robert
Briggs, indicted for assaulting and at
tempting to murder Rebecca Moore,
colored, pleaded guilty to assault and
was sentenced to eighteen months i'm
prisonment. John Saville, Edward
Hooper, and Joseph Dugan were in
dicted on the charge of larceny. The
state ignored the bill charging An
drew Hackett with using a female child
for immoral purposes. Edward McCon-
9 nell, charged with burglary, did not
answer when his name was called and
his bail bond was declared forfeited.
Eugene NJ. Sayers was his bondsman.
The case against Harry Maddox was
retired.
u The afternoon session was spent by
u the Superior Court in going over the
= trial list. OF the 1877 casss on the list
9 the following were marked for trial al
this term: william Condor VS.. Mary
IL Fennessey; Henry Talley's administra-
9 tors VS.. Philadelphia, Wilmington and
% Baltimore Railroad Company, specia
Jury; Robert Doran VS.. William G
Pennypacker; Thomas e. Shea We. Ag
mes Kerr; Hattie e. Burris vs.. th'
philadelphia, Wilmington and Balti
E more Railroad Company, special jury
g. John Weldon VS.. the Philadelphia, VIII
minseton and Baltimore Railroad Com
O. pany, special jury; Lewis L. WILCOX
he administrator of johanna G. WILCOX
lie VS.. the Wilmington City Railway Com
nv nanny: George T. Price VS.. Charles War
no ner Company, special jury; Alice Mu
mt lin and Thomas NIullin VS.. F. Blumer
,e- thai & Co.; the Huber Manufacturin
NJ COMPANY vs. John b. Nelson; Tschud
ed Catts VS.. Samuel Loaand; John
he Mitchell VS.. William E. Taylor; VIII
ise cent o. Hill VS.. John CHM; Il. ]
nd Clark VS.. philadelphia, Wilmingtc
as- and baltimore Railroad Company, SD
use cial jury; Frank II. Thoma
ct al. VS.. Philadelphia, w
ne mington and Baltimore Railroad Cor
md many; J. d. Bush vs.. Adams Expire
M Company; J. II. Bregger VS.. G.
lie. Shuler; B. S. Caulk VS.. Wdllia
am Bright's administrator; G. c. Brown
ap- Thomas Green. & Son; Mauanton
es: Grasso VS.. Philadelphia, Wilmingt'
rgs and Baltimore Railroad Company sI
In cial Jury; Julia Beecher VS.. Wilmin
c. ton Mills Manufacturing COmpan
or Eva B. Taylor VS.. Pullman Palace c
Company. special jury; Morris
Friedman VS.. John McGowan; Niche
AID Crostic VS.. Philadelphia, Wilmingt
and and baltimore Railroad Company, 81
tion cial Jury; John Holland VS.. BaltimH
nor and Ohio Railroad Company; John
Dton EHason VS.. Lebig Manufacture
Mr. Company; A6bie II. Dearborn vs. 10
in r. Richards; John Green VS.. ArlingT
del Mills Manufacturing Company; Jo
and b. Taylor VS.. Trustees Of the Poor;
until f. Iawless' administrator VS.. Pusey 9
rden Jones Company, special jury; Theod
ight Gail VS.. William Y. Tupple; Wilmi
5ren ton Mal.eable Iron Company
Charles Heinel & Son; David Fox
F.. P. Hickman; w. II. Maguire &
!. vs.. Elwood Garrett; Marquardt &
~ VS.. Charles e. Fritz; Chester s.
nam Casting Company VS.. Whining
A 90 NFalleable Iron Company; Charles
resi- Aleer VS.. f. Blumenthal & Co., spe
adel- Jury; Patrick Dougherty, administers
A nv OF James Hayden VS.. Philadelphia, y
Mr. mington and Baltimore Railroad @
nen4 pany, special jury; Susan Murphy
n5ed Fire Association Of Philadelphia;
FAM ME Brogger VS.. George g. Schuler;
this pix Printing company vs. SOu
Printing Company; John Billing
VS.. Mayor and Council Of Whining
Mercantile Printing Company VS.. {
heriff Sssterhenn; Fannie M. Baker
" af- James Gibson Carroll; Jennie p.
r. at Brides administrator VS.. PhiladelI
q and Wilmington and Baltimore Rail-
200: Company. special jury; Carrie q. v
/, e17 lev VS.. philadelphia, Wilmington
6 r Baltimore Railroad Company, sp
Jury; Thomas E. Mcbride, adminh
tor VS.. Philadelphia, Wilmington
Baltimore Railroad Company, sp
ng re- jury; Frank A. Mitchell vs.. Port
q II nedy Stag Works; ]. A. Pierce VS..
ter of Huber; A. R. AIaher VS.. II. c. MC
homer d 7. Mention vs. Baltimore and p
were delphia Railroad Company, So
re,lev fury; w. II. Greenwalt & Son. VS..
wi1iamson: e. p. Moody, use Of q