Evening journal., 1903-05-19
ODD ASSAULT
CASE IN COURT
Continued From First page).

nam AuiAei' chdrBed with breaking into
a dwelling with intent to commit larceny;
Herman Benson, larceny. and Joseph
Dennis, assault.
At the afternoon session OF the
Court of General Sessions Yesterday
the following true bills were returned.
Highway robbery and carrying con-
cealed deadly weapon. John W. Raj
son. i''''
Carrying concealed deadly weanons
Walter Christie. John e. Medford and
John Mccullough.
Assault with intent to commit nour-
der, Solvorano Juliano.
Larceny, John DeCosto. Frank
Schultz and Andrew BrOmis.
Trial List Reviewed.
The greater part OF the afternoon
session was occupied in going over the
trial list. The following cases were
marked for trial
John MacFarlane VS.. Garrett & Barr.
John w. Pennington and Mary II
Pennington VS.. John f. Lewis; Mar
tina j. Cannon. for the use of William
Sutton VS.. p. b. & W. r. p 90
Courtland Wagon Company VS.. John
r. Springers administrator: Horace
Vaughan's executor, plaintiff below.ap-
pellant VS.. Alexander Maxwell. defend
ant below. respondent; Jennie T.
Blackburn VS.. T. Blumenthal & Co.
Raffaele Du Gugliolmo VS.. M. Megarv
q Son, ct al; William c. Lattomus ct
al. VS.. William Il. Hawkins, ct al: +.
Blumenthal & Co. VS.. p, w. & b. r. r.
Co; Edward j. Finn VS.. same Joseph
II. Blat2s administrators VS.. same:
Beatrice Leitch, defendant below an
pelant VS.. Sue G. Elliott, plaintiff be-
low. respondent; Albert Frankish. d. b.
a. VS.. Sue G. Elliott p. b. r.; Thomas
Burris. p. b. a. VS.. James NJ. Cleaver.
d. b. r.; Margaret Quinn, by her next
friend VS.. Peoples Railway Cmpany:
James Quinn VS.. same; Charles II. Col
burn VS.. the Mayor and Council OF
Wilmington: Mary A. Robinson VS..
Peoples Railway Company; Henry r.
Schuchler VS.. Robert Coburn Dick
sons administrator; Charlotte NJ.
Boudwin vs.. the Wilmington City
Railway Company; John J. Walsh VS.
Michael Walsh's executor; Walter
Feat's administrator VS.. p, w. & b. r.
r. Co.; James G. Tgner VS.. Diamond
State Steel Company; Philip Reybold
VS.. Denny Brothers; Paul L. Lengel VS..
Bush & Reyner; John w. England's
next friend VS.. Peoples Railway Com
pany; Charles e. Sparks, Jr., d. b. a..
VS.. George NJ. Moss p. b. r.; Theodore
| Becker, d. b. a, VS.. Bartgis & Brothers.
p. b. r.; Edward V. DuRoss VS.. Will
mington City Railway Company; State
of Delaware. relation of attorney gem
eral VS.. Elmer Kennedy and others
Matte d. Myers vs.. George c. Davis ;
/ Fox Brothers & Co. VS.. Delaware Cen
eral Electric Company; Alice Chesbro
VS.. Edward ]. Colvin ct al; George w.
Duncan VS.. Merritt ~ Willis. ct al;
Francis j. Dugan. by his next friend,
VS.. p. w. & B. r. r. Co.; Ida v
Reese VS.. same; Bader Brothers VS..
Peoples Railway Company; William
S. Ammon VS.. Johnson Forge Com
pany: James L. Kennedy VS.. Delaware
Cotton Company; Joseph L. Lau-
dacher's Misunderstanding Frederick
Ruf. Valentine Laubacher and Joel
Hutton's administrator VS.. the JessuT
and Moore Company; David w. Fisher
VS. p B. & w r. r. Co; George I
Charles Kohlbecker VS.. Wilmington
city Railway Company; Ellen McCor-
mick. Hannah j. Burke, Joseph F
Henry's administrators and Margaret
Sweeney VS.. Jessup and Moore Com
pany; John Lynn vs. Wilmington Cit,
Railway Company; Mary T. Davis anc
/, Mary c. Milburne VS.. Peoples Railway
. Company; Patrick Fahey. d. b. a. VS.
r. Cardwell & Son, p. b. r.; same VS.
same: Henry e. Conner. d. b. a. VS.
Thomas A. Brown, p. b. r.; William
O. Sweatman, ct al. VS.. Wilmington
City Railway Company; William A. q
/ Sweatman VS.. same: John BOrkowsh
ct al. VS.. St. Hedwig's Church, Emil!
Popp VS.. Lydia e. Bartram; Victor X
5 PYLE VS.. the city; the Diamond stat
Steel Company VS.. Alvin r. Morrison
I James II. DUNCAN VS.. Wilmington Clt
Railway Company; Hunt WILKINSON
{ Company Us. John Mccoy.
( Special iuries may be summoned 10
2 the cases of i. Blumenthal q Co. 70
ward ]. Finn. Joseph II. Blatzs al
Z rnfnistrator. Walter McFeats admin
= istrator VS.. the r., b. g. W. X. X. 90.
and David w. Fisher VS. r.. ~ q
In. r. Co: Charles NJ. Boudwin. Eu
u ward V. DuRoss. John Lynn, Wlillai
u A. o. Sweatman VS.. the Wilminsto
ss c,itv Railway Company, and James
ii ,rigner Us. Diamond state Steel Con
. nany. .o oontinue
~ when that Of John II. paeer VS.. WI
y Item IT Churchman was called II Wa
It -, a,,1onncea that the defendant w'
y taad The case OF Charles Pratesi'
I. vs the city. p. b. r. was referr'
It - m.c counseL settlement is reached
~ 49, to he reached in the Watts
u u c.e,,~o,e 60 II. Ward ejectment suit; fre,
3 'tIs, r. Hodges VS.. Sallie A. Pehh
re packsr ejectment suit.
rs ri. 20 phil