Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1899-02-09


from acting.
After being qualified, Justice Garrison
in directing them in their duty, paid the
tribute to the pacific condition of oul
county quoted above. 1t is one which
must carry qualification to every good
citizen, and enlist strong endeayor to
make the condition the rule rather than
the exception.
The experimental call of the list o.
Supreme Court issues showed the follow
ing cases off by agreement
BOrt0n B. Smith vs.. Edward r. Wood
John w. Wescott. E. A. Armstrong.
Ella Wilkinson vs. Joseph 1. Skull
Clymer. Cole, Watkins and Moore.
The following cases were ready for
trial r.
Isaac C. Stevenson vs.. Isaac Stevenson
Carlow. Jessup.
Charles F. Fetser, admir-. of John F.
Packer VS.. the w. J. s. r Company. Yves.
colt. Gsskill.
William McIlvaiu, admir-. vs. Atlantic
City Railroad Company. Carrow. Nor
gan.
E. P. Henry VS.. John II Dialogue &
Son. Watkins Voorhees, and Reynolds.
The case OF the Glassboro Bank vs.. VIM
q. and Edward Banning, was passed,
pending the argument for new trial in
the olu case of William 81. Burning VS.
the Glassboro Bank.
As stated above. there are twenty-one
cases of Thomas Whiticar, Receiver OF the
Insurance Company against as
many defendants, to-Wit: E. G. Miller,
Joseph Higgins, Edward P Hall, William
B. Gleason. Fred. II. Thompson, Isaac l.
Orr, Moses Batten, George NJ. Hall, Charles
c. DAVIS, Charles D. Lippincott. j. Clark
Helms, George Fl. Platt, A bigail Hall,
Isaac Vanueman, William G. Cowgirl,
Zeziah Wallace, Benjamin F. McCollister,
s. Gill, Robert 81. Moore, Henry w.
John B. Mitchell
In these cases Samuel Fl. Richards
the Receiver, and a David j.
Pancoast all the defendants except Joseph
Higgins who is represented by John J.
CrandsIl
Mr.. Crandali asked an order directing
the complainant to make fuller reply to
than were contained in
those sent him, the specifications being
as to the names, residence, and proof of loss
by those slicy holders which rendered an
assessment on the premium notes gwen
the Company by his client, necessary.
This request was argued at considerable
length, and with much ability by the
respective counsel, at thej conclusion of
which Justice Garrison granted the request
or fuller answer.
An experimental call was then made of
he Circuit Court list, and these cases were
reported ready for trial:
Vessels vs. Crummins. Swackhsmer.
Watkins
Halsey admir-. VS.. Richards. Summerill.
Psneoast.
The Mayor and Council of Woodbury. VS..
Samuel M. Hudson. Watkins HOlliug-
shed, Jr.
Anspach VS.. Keniple. Iszard. Sum
merrill.
Weaver & Co, VS.. Camden, Gloucester
and Woodbury. r. R. Company. Sum-
merrill. Morgan.
Kern ct. ais, VS.. H. G. Green. clymer.
SWackhamer.
Camisi vs.. Mele. Starr. Summerill.
George w. West VS.. William Brooks.
Summerill Jessup.
The eases of West vs.. Schlag. Elmer vs.
Green VS. L. g. and W. Silver,
Garrett vs.. AIMS, Thomas S. Weatherby
vs.. Sparks and Richards, exrs. went off for
the term.
The trial of Circuit Court issues will
begin before Judge Miller next Wednes-
day.
The motion for a new trial in the case
Of William H. Burning VS.. the Glassboro
Bank, was argued before Judge Jessup
and denied.
THE GRAND JURY.
The Grand Inquest completed its inves-
legation of complaints before the noon
recess, having considered two complaints
and returned one true bill of indictment
against Andrew Perkins, colored, of Wool.
Tieh, for stirocious assault on one John
,on, of his own color Perkins pied not
guilty aud was released on bail Trial will
be on Thursday.
LICENSES
The following applications for license
were filed on Tuesday;
The Delaware River Amusement Co
pany, known as Washington Park.
SOmers R. SteeIman, Clayton.
Marvin DiYls, Clay ton.
John FL. Gould, Jr Even.
John q. Herman, North Woodbury..
Jacob F. Maier, Newfeld.
On account Of Monday being legal holi.
birthday-licenses will be
disposed OF on Saturday next. Remon.
STANCES must be filed before noon, and
lncontested cases will be disposed of in the
afternoon. Contested applications on the
Thursday.
WEDNEsDAY, Feb. s.
The trial of the case of the Receiver Of
he MillVille Mutual Fire and Marine In-
surance Co. against E. G. Miller, of Pauls.
bOro, WAS begun this morning, Thos
French and S. H. Richards for the Receiver
and ex-Judge D. J. Pancoast and A. H.
Swackhamer for Miller.
A jury was empanelled without loss Of
time, and Mr.. Richards briefly outlined the
case, as being a suit to re.
cover from holders Of premium notes losses
sustained by the Company, and expenses Of
the Receivership. He explained the nature
Of Mutual companies. and then called the
of the Company, Richard L.
Howell, to prove that the application aud
premium note given by Miller were identi
cal 10 notes issued by the company in al
all cases. To this Judge Paneoast objected
and was sustained.
lot of records of early cases in th.
Court of Chancery were offered in evidenct
by the cOmplainauts, which Judge Pan
coast said were competent proof of The de
cree Of the Court az to the Compsny's in.
solVency, but he was not willing TO admit
the truth Of insolvency. Sustained.
Thos Whitaker, testified that be wa:
appointed Receiver on Sept %, 1885. Some
thing less than cart load of papers, claim
filed by the Receiver were offered in evi
dence, bat were objected to by Mr.. Pan
coast, because they eminated from th,
Special Master and the Receiver had n,
knowledge of them. The obiec
ton was not sustained, and an exception
WAS allowed.
Witness then told how papers of th,
company, relating to policies up to $500
were destroyed by FIRE, through ignoranc
of their value by q temporary custodian.
o. cross-examination witness testifie.
assessment was made against at least on
policy held by defendant; the assessmen
was based on both branches of loeses-fir
and marine-and expenses Of both branche
and included expenses Of the Receiyershil
to the time Of the assessment He testidel
that these expenses were made up by th
Special Master width, subsequent to hi
appointment, amounted TO about $40 600.
At this point Justice Garrison asked Nj