Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1900-06-07
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT.

Ey Otate detective bernard u. McN6y
VS.. Peter j. Ford, in the Superior
Court, was dropped Monday. On
morning, ii was expected that
case would be for trial Monday, before
q special jury, but later the announce
ment was made that tho case had been
settled. The denial of this by State
Detective MeVey led to some uncer.
tainty rs to what was the status of the
case and so the Developments OF the
court session were awaited with inter-
est
Judge Grub presided and Judges
Pennewill and Boyce we're with him OH
the bench. Prothonotary Wool'ey called
over the list of special jurors aud in
the course of business, Judge Grubb
called up the Money VS.. Ford case.
Meanwhile Mr.. McVey and his counsel,
Attorney General Robert @. White of
Georgetown and Walter II. Hayes of
this city, had conferred concerning the
case. When it was called, Mr.. White
addressed the court, saying the cnse
was for trial Monday, ho believed, hut
Saturday last, Messrs. Ward and Hilles,
counsel for Mr.. Ford, had handed
counsel for Mr.. McVey this communi-
cation:
Wilmington. Dell, June I'd, 1900. =
Hon. Robert G. White and Walter ii.
Hayes, attorneys for Bernard j. McVey
in the case OF Bernard j. McVey VS..
Peter j. Ford, being NJ. 3S to May
term, 1889, Of the Superior Court of
the State of Delaware, in and for New
Castle county:
Gentlemen: In relation to the charges
made by ME at Dover on Fet ruary 2lst,
1893, in the Senate chamber, against
Bernard }. Money, am willing to say
that all such charges were made by me
in the performance of what | then be-
lieved to be duty I owed the public,
and were Eased solely ON information
upon which felt 1had right to rely.
| now feel was misinfolmed as 10 said
charges. Yours very truly,
Peter j. Ford.
Mr.. White continued: lin view of
the fact that Mr.. Ford has made this
acknowledgment OF his error, we
would ask that the case ba dismissed. +"
Judge Grub announced the dis
missal of the case.
Members of the last Senate had been
| summoned as witnesses. Most of them
wore notified that the case would not
he tried. Senators BlaKely and Hart
| we're in court, having failed to tecaive
| the word.
II very reluctantly allowed the case
to be dropped, said Detective MONEY!,
after the notien had been taken in the
case. can my friends advised me to
drop it after he wrote that letter. y
In explanation of consenting TO the
discontinuaDoe Of the case, Mr.. MoEey
said that he did not want the people to
think he was prosecuting Mr.. Ford.
WAGES MAY HAVE PREFERENCE.
The court read its opinion in the
case of Ralph q. Lupton, trading as
Ralph c. Lupton & Co., VS.. David W.
Hughes. Lupton, as landlord, and
numerous employees Of the Sun Pub
! fishing Co., sought to secure preference
in claims against an amount held by
Constable Hughes as the proceeds oil
the sale of effects of the Sun Publish
ing Go. The court decided that wages
take preference of the landlords claim
and of executions. The whole amount
will he divided among the employees.
In the case of Margaret Ford &c. vs..
the Bavarian Brewing TO-, both Harry
p. Joslyn and William s. Hilles asked
that their names be withdrawn fion
the list. They represented the plaintiff,
who had made settlement without con
sultine them. HoifecKer a. Hotfeckel
represented the company.
LIEBERMAN SECURES MORE JUDGMENTS
The court affirmed the awards O.
referees 10 the remaining actions by thu
First National Bank for the use o
Nathan Liebernian VS.. John Sparks
administrator, Peter 7. Il. Smith. Mr.
Sparks was on one of the bonds OF
which the bank brought suit. Afte
the dsfalcation of the paying teller
The judgments are Tor about $4,000
Judgment for about that amount wa
previously secured against the Hannal
Sparks estate. ..#..
The case of August Max Hoffman, Q
al, vs.. the Wilmington City Railwa.
Go. was discontinued.
In the superior Court Monda,
afternoon the damage suit OF John W
Hall VS.. Clerk of the Market Michae
Conneli was resumed. William b. Hall
the plaintiffs father, who las been
farmer near Newark for about 80 years
offered in evidence permit to occnp
stalls Nos. 706 and TOT in King stree
.. market, for the year from May LIST
1899, TO May LIST, 1900, for which h
, said he had paid 81. 80. John W. Hail
I the plaintiff, said while no was occupy
! ing the stall No. FOG, last Juns, til
I clerk Of the market told him to move
) that the stall had been rented t
: another man. He refused to move an
4 on another day was again asked ;
d move. Again he refused to compl
0 with the order and he and his siste
! were arrested. He was locked up ar
subsequently he was taken into tn
n prisoners dock, in the court room an
tiled, after which he was discharge
by Judge Ball, who said it had M
o been shown that he had violated an
Y law. Witness said he believed tn;
3 when his sister was arrested she WI
/ made prisoner in this matron's qua
4 ters. He said he lost much of til
days business by the arrest, and whe
he was taken to the police station |
was searched and all his effects kel
from him while he was prisone
? While in the prisoner dock he fe
u very much humiliated.
. Benjamin Foote of No. 704 Kir
. street testified to the arrest. After ii
: arrest nobody was left to take char
. of Mr.. Halls wagon.
u Recorder of Deeds Clark testifi,
i that thu records show that Mr.. Come
10 owns property in the city valued
So, 800, as follows: West side Of kir
wood street between Eighth and Taylo
IN worth $1,000; property at Fifth al
j. Spruce streets, $1,000. Deputy Sher
., Francis S. Bradley testified that d
1T salary of the clerk CT the market
ty $500 year and the fees run the col
to pensation up to about $1,000
D. Horace G, Knowles, who represent