The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1899-01-17
HUSTINGS COURT
NOW IN SESSION
Suit Of Ballard & Ballard Against G,
W. Brooks Sureties.
CASES IN THE MAYORS COURT.
important Finding of a Chesterfield
Jury-Thicf Lost His Booty and
His Overcoat-Other News from
the Southside.
Manchester Bureau. Richmond Times,
1112 Hun street. Beattie Block.

Manchester Bureau. Richmond Times,
11l2 Hun street. Beattie Block.
The Hastings Court convened in the
January term yesterday.
In the case of Emalne Brown the
colOred girl, who is alleged TO have
stolen gold watch and chain from Mrs
COrnelia A. Leonard on october 18th,
tbs value Of the article she is charged
with taking, were found By the grand
Jury 10 be less than SO and the case
then developed into one of petit larceny
and was remanded back 70 the Mayors
Court where il viii be tried to-day.
TIE trand jury were then discharged.
A number OF civil cases were set for
hearing, the most interesting of which
was that of Ballard & Ballard against
L.. L. TOney and Lewis + Kidd sureties
for George W. Brooks former high con-
stable.
The plaintiffs alege that Brooks col
iected for them the sum of $3.50 from l.
III. Reynolds and that he failed to turn IL
over, whereupon they sue his sureties
Tor the recovery OF the same. The case
will be called on Friday. Mr.. Hay Gar
nett is counsel for the defence.
IN THE MAYORS COURT
In the Mayors Court there were sew
eral cases disposed Of yesterday.
Henry Green and Annie Branch. both
colored, got into a dsputation Saturday
night and became disorderly. Annie
called Henry some names and Henry
sd pped Annie and because Annie
couldn't furnish security FOR her be-
heviour for sixty days, she was sent 10
Jail. and Henry had TO hustle around to
md $3.50 70 pay his fine
sam Nenable (colored) was fined $3.50
Tor being disorderiy on the street.
AN IMPORTANT CASE.
An Important case has Just been de-
decided in the Chesterfield County Court
In reference 10 liabilities of parties deal
ing with agents
The facts IN the case. together with
the instructions asked by the plaintiff
and those given by the court. follows.
The facts In the case viii be read with
Interest by formers ana merchants as
well as members Of the legal fraternity.
on November o. 1895. VIM. Schroeder
farmer OF Powhatan. sent three fine
cattle TO market for sale by Mr. Hea-
cock. a young man living near BY tell
ing him at the time that unless ne could
get $50 In cash for them he must return
the cattle. On November 2eth Mr.. Hea-
cock sold the cattle 20 Mr.. Charles Stein
IN Manchester, for $40 I'm cash. with
promise OF check for SsS by mail on the
following Monday. About an hour after
wards Heacock met Schroeder in Rich
mond and Informed him Of the sale so
made. Schroeder Immediately went 10
Stein. handed him back the $40. telling
him that the sale was made contrary
10 his authority. and demanded his cat
tie. Stein refused 10 give the cattle up
unless Schroeder wOuld pay him $500
prott When Schroeder handed the $40
back TO Stein, Heac0ck also told Stein |
not 10 send the check TO him-Heacock
Schroeder then brought suit for the cat |
tie. claiming that the sale was illegal |
and not binding on him. ID. l.. Puiliam. /
ESQ. OF Manchester. appeared for Stein. |
and cited Taylor VS. Hatch. 10 n. H.. /
5&. and I Min. Inst, side page. 20S-9, /
asking Instructions accordingly Judge !
Gregory. OF Chesterfield appeared FOR /
Schroeder, and cited Story's Agency. sec /
tons 126. l27 1871. 1872 49, ana notes "a |
Va 24s: S. r. 379-S2; Mo- 420-1: [
Johns Rep. 1850; "A FLA. e4-1; and 25
Neb.. 1903. and offered the following in
structions:
THESE INSTRUCTIONS ASKED.
II the jury shall believe from the evil
dence in this case that the plaintiff
Schroeder. was not accustomed 10 send
cattle 10 market for sale hy Hcacock as
his agent. and that he only employed
said Heacock on the 18th o. November
1SoS 30 take his three cattle mentioned I
IN this suit 20 market for sale with au-
thority and instructions not TO sell said
cattle for less than $40 ia cash. otherwise
to return said cattle. and n they shall
further believe from the evidence that
said Heacock SOLD said cattle TO tho de-
PENDANT Stein for smaller sum and on
different terms than he was authorized
10 do by said SCHROEDER then the cour,
instructs the jury 10 find for the plain
tin Schroeder; unless they shah further
believe from the evidence that the plain
iii schroeder subsequently ratified tho
act of said ficacock under which said
Stein claims TO have bought said cattle
from said Heacock. a. the agent OF the
plaintiff Schroeder.
II the Jury shall believe from the evil
deDce that the plaintiff SCHROEDER bad not
held out 10 the public the said Heacock
as hts agent FOR selling his cattle in the
market on and before the said 26th day
OF November 1888. but only employed
said Hcacock 20 sell his three cattle
mentioned IN this suit on this particular
occasion, and that the defendant Stein
knew. or by proper Ina iiry could have
known that the said Heacock was en-
ployed TO sell said cattle for said Schro-
der on particular terms and prices and
that said Stein failei 10 make such In
auiry. then the court Instincts The Jury
that the said Stein dealt with the said
'f>acock a. his own peril: and that N
said Stein bought said cattle from said
Eieaeock contrary to the authority given