Volume 3 — West Virginia Reports

At tbe July rules, 1862, John D. D. Rosset filed a bill in tbe clerk’s office of tbe circuit court of Jackson county, alleging that in the year 1850 he sold to one Straley a tract of land in that county; that Straley died without having paid the purchase money, and that his heirs sold and conveyed the land to Jacob H. Staats, who undertook to pay the complainant the purchase money; that in May, 1856,'the complainant conveyed the land to Staats wTho was to give his note with…

This case arose in Fayette county in 1860. It was very imperfectly matured in tbe court below. Tbe President in bis opinion gives tbe essential features of tbe controversy.

<p>An order setting aside a judgment in the circuit court, at the same term at which it was rendered, is an interlocutory order from which no appeal lies. And an order of that character made prior to the act of February 29, 1868, is not affected thereby.</p>

• Peter J. Hyre obtained an injunction from the judge of the circuit court of Pendleton county in May, 1866, staying the sale of a certain tract of land by John M. Jones, trustee.

A judgment was rendered in the circuit court of IJpshur county, on the 18th day of November, 1863, in 'favor of David Haselden and C. P. Eohrbough, partners, against William T. Higginbotham, Isaac J. Post, John S. Huffman, John D. Imboden and William L. Jackson, for 8,000 dollars.

This case was brought up from Lewis county. The summons served upon Johnson N. Camden, the defendant, was returnable to the 1st day of March term, 1867, of the circuit court of that county. The following is the order from which appeal was made: “ O’Brien, Grafflin and Hanson vs. Johnson N. Camden.

This cause arose in Mason county in May, 1866. The point on which the ease was decided here was that the contract of sale as alleged in the bill was not fully established by the proof; that even if established as alleged i-t must be done by the testimony of more than one witness, where there were no corroborating circumstances, to contradict the answer.

Tbe Manufacturers and Farmers Bank, of Wheeling, instituted an action of assumpsit in the circuit court of Ohio county, in October, 1865, against John M. Mathews and James Gittings, partners, under the firm of J. M. Mathews & Co., upon a bill of exchange dated September 22d, 1856, due in sixty days. The declaration was filed at the November rules, 1865.

Barnett Cushwa, administrator, with the will annexed, of John B. Sanaker, deceased, brought an action of trover in March, 1866, in the circuit court of Berkeley county, against Margaret J. Sanaker, for the value of a negro man bequeathed specifically, after the payment of testator’s just debts, by the last will and testament of the deceased to said Margaret J., his sister, the said negro man, being a part of the personal assets of the estate of the testator, which it was…

William A. Elliot, and others, heirs at law of Andrew-Young, deceased, brought an action of ejectment in Hancock county, in June,‘1860, against Robert Sutor, to recover five acres of land owned by them in fee simple.

At the March rules, 1866, Samuel W. Wysong, assignee of G. W. Eichelberger, brought an' action of debt against Amos Shepherd in the circuit court of the county of Jefferson. The declaration averred that the defendant made his sealed obligation for 1,000 dollars On the 1st day of January, 1859, to become due on the 1st day of March, 1862.

On tbe 21st day of April, 1836, John Brant, of Alleghany county, Maryland, sold to General Duff Green, of Washington city, by written indenture, several tracts or parcels of land, part of them… Held: that a purchaser of land who has received a deed containing a covenant of warranty, cannot plead to an action on the bond given for purchase money, defect of title, unless he has been evicted by title paramount.

It is unnecessary to g'iv.e any other statement of this cause than what is made in the opinion of the president. The grounds on which the court below predicated its decree are pointed out by the opinion here, and are determined to be substantial.

These.causes, which were heard together, arose in Jefferson county. The questions considered involved the possession of certain church property which was respectively claimed by the M. E. Church, of the United States, and the M. E. Church, South.

George W. Tuttle, of the State of New York, filed a bill in the circuit court of Preston county, on the 11th day-of February, 1861, against Joseph and Asher Brakelej’, partners under the firm of J. & A. Brakeley.

This cause arose in Kanawha county. The summons was returnable to June rules, 1866. The material facts are given in the opinion of the President. '

In 1862, Jámes W. Brown and Catherine Snider filed a bill in the circuit court of Preston county, against Jacob Snider and Samuel W. Snider, administrators with the will annexed of Jacob Snider, Sen., deceased.

John Lewis and Samuel Lewis were the joint owners of a tract of 1,000 acres of land in Kanawha county.

<p>The opinion of the judge in this case contains a statement of all material facts.</p>

The declaration in this case was filed in the clerk’s office of the circuit court of Taylor county, at July rules, 1864.

This suit was instituted in Taylor county in 1858. The certificate of the justices mentioned in the opinion of the court was as follows : “Virginia — Taylor county, to wit: We, James Selvy and William Gather, justices of the peace in the said county and State of Virginia, do hereby certify that John W. Sinsel and Elizabeth, his wife, parties to the foregoing deed, bearing date of the 21st day of May, 1858, personally appeared before us in our said county and acknowledged the…

At the May term, 1867; of the circuit court of Hardy county, Robert J. Tilden, late sheriff of said county and committed administrator of Michael Yoakum, deceased, and others, his sureties, filed their motion to quash an execution issued against them by Riley Yoakum from the clerk’s office of said court, on the 80th day of April, 1867.

The matter in controversy in this case sufficiently appears in the opinion of the president. The case arose in Wyoming county, and the summons was brought to June rules, 1866.

The opinion of the judge in this cause gives the material points of controversy. . This cause was once before in the court of appeals. The decree dismissing the bill was reversed and the.case remanded for the appellant to have an opportunity to propound the codicil in question to the probate court as a testamentary paper, and if deemed a testamentary paper and ordered to record, then for the chancery court to construe it.

This cause was heard in Ohio county, and the. bill was 'filed at April rules, 1865. The matters arising on the question of the removal of the cause from the State to the Federal court is fully stated in the opinion of the judge.

This was an action of trespass quare clausam fregit, brought to August rules, 1866, in Hampshire county.

Abraham Snider died seized of certain real estate in Berkeley county. Held: that the will did not authorize a sale until the death or marriage of the widow. This establishes the proposition that the renunciation-of the widow does not change the construction of the will or the powers of the executor. . 3 Leigh, 179, 182-3.

tí. T. Qua trier and Monroe Quarrier bought at the commissioner’s sale of forfeited and delinquent lands for the county of Kanawha, on the 9th day of August, 1841, a tract of land said to contain 50,000 acres, forfeited for the nonpayment of taxes, as the property of John Beach and Philo Norton. In April, 1854, they brought an action of ejectment against Samuel H. Early and Edward Kenna to recover the land.

William T. Mania filed a bill in the circuit court of Green-brier county, in March, 1867, against Andrew Lewis and John Argabright. It was alleged in the bill that in October, 1856, one John Butler sold to Lewis a tract of land, and bound himself in a title bond to make a deed by the 25th day of December, 1856. No purchase money was paid at the time of the sale. Butler died in 1859, and Ar-gabrite was his executor.

This cause arose in Monroe county. The injunction was awarded in December, 1860, to a judgment obtained in September of the same year. The injunction was dissolved in November, 1867.

This case arose in Greenbrier county, in May, 1867. The questions arising in the case appear in the opinion of the judge.

Robert McVey filed a bill in tbe circuit court of Green-brier county, in January, 1867, against William T. Mann, alleging that one Lewis Burdett, with Moses Hedrick as his surety, executed two bonds to the complainant in March, 1859, for 460 dollars each.

<p>This cause arose in Taylor county, in 1864. The opinion of the judge contains a statement of the material facts.</p>

In June, 1866, Alexander Williams brought an action of trespass on the case against Charles Ruffner and others, in the circuit court of Nicholas county. The suit was abated as to two of the defendants, and the others pleaded not guilty. At the April term, 1867, the jury empanneled in. the case found a verdict for 500 dollars damages against the defendant Ruffner alone, and found the other defendants not guilty.

John Engle died on the 18th day of October, 1865, testate, in Jefferson county. He devised his lands equally to his four sons “subject to the doymr of his beloved wife,” Susan A. Engle. Prior to his death a crop of wheat had been sown on his lands, which was harvested by his executor, James W. Engle, in the wheat harvest of 1866. The net proceeds of the wheat amounted to 2,756 dollars and 45 cents.

J. D. McCullough obtained a judgment, in the circuit court of Mason county, against W. L. Maddy, G. W. Gar-gill and S. G. Shaw. A writ of fieri facias was issued on the 14th day of May, 1867. A forthcoming bond was taken forfeited and quashed. A new bond was taken which was also forfeited and returned to the clerk’s office. The writ of fieri facias had been levied on the property of Shaw ou the 3d day of July, 1867.

This case was determined upon the facts alleged and proven in the settlement of the partnership account between the parties, and which are substantially set forth in the opinion of the judge. The case was brought to December rules, 1866, in Marshall county.

Haselden k Rohrbough brought an action of trespass on the case «against William T. Higginbotham, Thomas W. Tillman, Isaac J. Post, John S. Huffman, John I). Imbo-den and William L. Jackson, in the circuit court of Hpshur county, to September rules, 1863. The summons was returned executed on Tillman and Post, and “not found” as to the other defendants.

Daniel Shumate gave his bond, under seal, for 706 dollars and 15 cents, to Hiram A. Burgess, dated October 29th, 1862. The consideration was stated to be for “money loaned.” Shumate died and James Calfee qualified as his administrator. Burgess brought suit in Baleigh county in 1866,,against the administrator, to recover the amount of the bond.

<p>1. Non damnificatw is a good plea to a suit on an attachment bond where the condition is that the plaintiff in the attachment “shall pay all costs and damages which may be awarded against him, or sustained by any person by reason of his suing out said attachment.” A plea of de injuria may also be filed.</p> <p>2. A case in which a plea of de injuria was held to be substantially in form.</p>

This case arose in the county of Greenbrier. The bill of injunction was filed at the March rules, 1867, and the decree upon which the appeal was taken to this court was rendered at the November term, 1867, of the circuit court of said county. The matter in controversy is sufficiently set forth in the opinion of the judge.

The declaration in this case, which was filed at May rules, 1867, in Wood county, is in the following words and figures: “ The defendants, William Scott and William II.

This cause was brought to April rules, 1866. The. complainant below, William Dorsey, filed a bill in the circuit court of Berkeley county, alleging his ownership in fee of a certain lot in Martinsburg, on which was erected a build-iiag fronting on Burke street with wing extending to the rear.

This ease arose in Berkeley county. The summons was issued on the 30th of March, 18(56. The questions which were determined by this court,, and through which the judgment below was affirmed, were upon the pleadings and are stated in the opinion of the judge.

The questions arising in this case were principally upon the construction of the provisions of the statutes incorporating the B. & O, R. R. company. The material sections of those statutes are given by the judge who delivered the opinion of the court, in which opinion, the merits of the controversy are substantially stated. Some questions, however, arose on the pleadings and proofs which require a more extended notice here.

John W. Pledges brought suit in the name of the sheriff of Berkeley county, on an indemnifying bond, against Iiobert K. Robinson and W. IP. Mong, his surety, to October rules, 1866. The bond was given in pursuance of the levy of an execution in favor of Robinson against Enoch G. Hedges, on property claimed by John W. Hedges. The defendant pleaded conditions performed. At the November term, 1867, a trial was had and a verdict rendered for the defendant.

<p>The material questions arising in this cause are stated in the opinion of the judge who delivered it.</p>

Elizabeth Gettle, as administratrix of Frederick Gettle, brought an action against the Baltimore and Ohio railroad company, in the circuit court of Berkeley county, to November rules, 1866. The action was trespass on the case. The declaration was filed at December rules following. In April, 1867, the defendant pleaded not guilty, and the case was continued.

“The Bank of Berkeley, in Virginia,” brought an actiorj of assumpsit in Berkeley county, in October, 1865,‘againsf the “Bank of the Valley, in Virginia,” claiming 4,313 doll lars and 78 cents with interest. An attachment issued ill March, 1866, against the defendant as a non resident debtoj and was executed on several parties as garnishees.

Hiram Bloss brought an action of trespass on the case in the circuit court of Wayne county to September rules, 1865, against John Plymale, Jesse Spurlock, Hurston Spurlock, William P. Shurlock, Hugh Bowen, M. J. Ferguson, James Ferguson, Achilles M. C. Davis, Edmund Osborn, Samuel Wellman and John Jarrell, Jr. The cause came on the docket and was continued at the December term, 1865.

<p>1. A party need not have any counsel in court if he can be present to give his case personal attention.</p> <p>2. If a suit is brought by an attorney not qualified to practice, it is no good cause to dismiss it; but the attorney should himself suffer the punishment imposed by law.</p>

The matter in controversy in this canse arose between creditors of the Bank of Charleston, located in Kanawha county. In 1861 the bank was removed by its officers to Lynchburg, Virginia.

Elizabeth Hinchman, curatrix, &c., having obtained a judgment against Albert Laidley in the circuit court of Cabell county, filed a bill in August, 1865, to subject the real estate of the defendant to the payment of the judgment lien. Want'of personalty to satisfy the lien was alleged in the bill, but it was not alleged that the rents and profits would not pay off the lien in five years.

On the 24th of June, 1851, John Godfrey, and Jane, his wife, filed their bill in the circuit court of Lewis county, against Richard Bond, Amos Heavener, and others heirs of John Mitchel, Sr., deceased, and the-cause was p'rocceeded in, in the circuit court of Lewis county until September, 1855, when it was transferred to and docketed in the circuit court of IJpshur county.

The summons in this cause was issued August 11th, 1860. On the same day (which it appears was not a rule day) an order of publication was awarded against absent defen-' danta. The order was duly published in the Kanawha Valley Star, published in Charleston, as appeared by the affidavit of the publisher, and was posted on the front door of the court-house of Kanawha county, on the 20th day of the same month.

In May, 1865, Edward Biggs brought an action of trespass on the case in assumpsit in the circuit court of Monon-galia county, against Shelby P. and George Weltner. The declaration was founded upon the following contract: “September .22d, 1864. Bought of Edward Biggs two thousand grape roots, one year old, at 16 dollars per hundred; [sweet apples 100; fall apples 100; winter apples 1,000; peach trees 2,000.

Jarvis Postlewait and Albert Postlewait brought an action of ejectment in the circuit court of Monongalia county, in June, 1865, against John Wise, to recover a certain tract of land in that county.

The declaration in this case was filed at December rules, 1867, in the clerk’s office of the circuit court of Berkeley county, by Charles Winternitz & Son, against Jacob Hyland and George W. Ramer. Held: “that when the President has proclaimed a State to be in insurrection,, the courts must hold that this condition continues until he decides the contrary.

<p>This cause arose in Marion county in 1866. It is unnecessary to give any of the particulars concerning its origin or progress, as this court decided only upon one question involved which goes to the right of the plaintiff below, Jesse Hartley, to bring his suit, having fraudently obtained possession of the contract, which was delivered as an escrow, that he sought to enforce.</p>

This cause arose in Greenbrier county. The summons was returnable to August rules, 1866. The opinion of the judge contains a sufficient statement of the points in controversy.

The matters stated in the original bill in this case do not appear to have been considered by this court, and it is unnecessary to state them.

<p>The act of February 27th, 1866, in relation to the statute of limitations, extending the time within which suits of trespass and .trespass on the case may be brought in certain counties, does not apply to an action of trespass on the case in assumpsit, nor to actions ex contractu, but only to actions of trespass and trespass on the case.</p>

The declaration in this cause was tiled in the circuit court of Kanawha county, by Rand & Minsker, at June rules, 1865, against Charles F. Hale. It averred that the defendant had, on the 3d of May, 1861, in Charleston, drawn and made his bill of exchange requiring one “L. A. Rosen-miller, Treas., 172 Eighth Avenue, New York,” to pay to the order of the plaintiffs, 164 dollars and 60 cents, sixty days after date ■; that the bill was duly protested for want of payment.

<p>1. In an action of unlawful detainer where the title to the property is admitted, on the trial, to he in the plaintiff, and a notice to quit the premises is offered in evidence, a, prima facie right to recover, is shown, and it is not error to permit such notice to be read in evidence to the jury.</p> <p>2. Although there was a trial of a cause before the passage of the act of February 7th, 1868, and a verdict rendered, yet if the verdict were set aside and anew trial granted, it was error not to permit aparty to the suit to be sworn as a witness, under the provisions of the act, on a trial had after the passage thereof.</p> <p>3. On the trial of an action of unlawful detainer in the circuit court of Ohio county, it was not error for the court to refuse to permit a summons in an action of unlawful detainer in the municipal court of the city of "Wheeling, claiming the same premises, to be read to the jury.</p> <p>4. "W. brought an action of unlawful detainer against Z., on the 6th day of November, 1867. On the trial of the cause, in March, 1868, the title to the premises was admitted to be in "W., and he proved the service of a notice on Z. to quit the premises on the 1st day of April, 1867, served December, 31st, 1866. Z. produced a written lease dated January 24th, 1864, for five years, in which it was stipulated that he was not to sublet the premises, and if he did so "W. might re-enter after ten days’ notice. To rehut this "W. produced, and was permitted to read to the jury,, a notice to Z., dated October 24th, 1867, stating a breach of the condition in relation to subletting, and requiring Z. to deliver possession on the 6th day of November, 1867. Held :</p> <p>That it was not error to permit the notice of October 24th, 1867, to be read, because the prima facie case of the plaintiff made on the admission of his title to the premises, and the proof of the notice served December 31st, 1866, had been rebutted.</p> <p>2. It was not error to permit the plaintiff to proceed in his case without producing his written lease, because he had made a prima fade case without it.</p>

This case arose in Ohio county. The summons was brought to March rules, 1868. A trial was had in May following, and verdict and judgment for the defendants. But one question required determination in this court, and that was, as to the alleged partnership of defendant James S. Wheat. The opinion of the president contains an ample statement of the material facts. Authorities to sustain first assignment of errors.

In 1847, J ames Vickers conveyed in fee to Polly Gibson a- tract of land on the Eocky Pork of Pocatalico river, Kanawha county, containing 300 acres. Polly Gibson was at the time a married woman, the wife of the appellee, Granville Gibson. She had a large family. Her husband, herself and 'family were living on this land, which was about all they had.

. This cause arose in Jackson county. The question determined by this court was whether the appellant, Eos-sett, was entitled to a continuance in the court below at the term when a final decree was had against him, September, 1866.

This cause arose in Fayette county in 1867. The question determined by this court sufficiently appears in the opinion of the judge.

This cause came from Kanawha county. The only question presented for the consideration of this court was that arising upon the matter of the lien of the judgments of Hill, administrator, and others. The opinion of the judge delivering it here, presents the essential features of the case.

<p>This cause came from Monroe county.</p>

A bill of injunction was obtained by the White Sulphur Springs Company from the circuit court of G-reenbrier county, against the sheriff and board of supervisors ^of that county to restrain the former from collecting taxes assessed on the property of the company for the years 1865-6-7.

This cause came from Greenbrier county. The summons was brought to September rules, 1865. The only question determined by this court was as to the validity of a contract made and partly executed, based on so-called Confederate treasury notes, and the effect of such a contract as to the rights of third parties. A sufficient statement of the matters bearing on this point appears in the opinion of the judge. The defendant, Elizabeth Weeden, below, appealed to this court.

Iii November, 1865, Fenton F. Randolph brought suit in the circuit court of Harrison county, against Samuel Good, Lewis Davis and William J. Williams, alleging in, the declaration, that at an election held in Ten-Mile township in said county, in October, 1865, the plaintiff offered to vote at said election, and that the defendants, who were the supervisor and inspectors of election at said voting place, refused to receive his vote, whereby he was damaged to the amount of…

The declaration in this case was filed at July rules, 1860. It was in an action of trespass on the case,.against the defendant as a common carrier, alleging that through the negligence and improvidence of its servants and agents, certain sheep which the defendant had undertaken by óontract to transport and deliver in safety and good condition for the plaintiff, from the city of Wheeling to Philadelphia, for the sum of 160 dollars, were lost to the plaintiff, to the value of…

Christopher Hoke, surviving executor of the last will of Christopher Hoke, deceased, filed a declaration at the May rules, 1867, in the circuit court of Monroe county, against John M. Hoke and Henry Hoke, averring that the defendants, by their certain writing obligatory, sealed with their seals, dated on the 25th day of June, 1863, promised to pay the plaintiff and one Eoyal Eleshman, since deceased, as executors of said Christopher Hoke, deceased, fhe sum of 3,234 dollars,…

The rules in these cases were awarded in the court below, as appears by the record, on the motion of the prosecuting attorney of the county, but the cases were proceeded on in this court in the name of the State. The opinion of the judge contains a sufficient statement of the point involved.

John M. Phares was elected by a majority of the votes cast, sheriff of Randolph county, at the general election held on the 4th Thursday of October, 1866, for the term of four years from the 1st day of January, 1867. At the November term of the circuit court of that county he gave bond and took the several oaths prescribed by law.

This case came from Ohio county. The action was as-sumpsit. The summons was brought to March rules, 1866. A trial was had at the May term, 1868, and a verdict rendered for the plaintiff for 625 dollars, and the court refusing to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial, gave judgment on the verdict. The court certified the facts proven. The opinion of the judge contains all that are necessary to a proper understanding of the case.

At the July rules, 1865, the plaintiffs, by the firm name of J. G. & J. M. Staunton & Co., filed a declaration in trespass on the case in the clerk’s office of the circuit court of Kanawha county, against the defendant, John Echols, alleging that on the 25th day of October, 1862, the defendant instigated and procured and ordered others to seize, take and carry away, thirty barrels of oil, the property of the plaintiff, from the landing at Malden in said county, of the value…

This case arose in Monroe county. Tbe declaration was filed at April rules, 1866, and contained but one count, the insimul computassent count averring that the plaintiff’s testator, upon accounting with the defendant’s testator, the latter owed the former 600 dollars, and being so indebted undertook, &c. • • There was no bill of particulars filed with tbe declaration.

Tbe action was trespass for “ unlawfully seizing, taking and carrying away certain property of the plaintiff,” by the defendant’s decedent, Wilson Lively. The writ was issued on the 10th of January,1866, and was made returnable to February rules, when the declaration was filed, and common order taken; and the common order was confirmed at March rules, and -a writ of enquiry awarded. This was all done upon an insufficient return of the officer upon the writ.

The county seat of Calhoun county was located at Ar-noldsburg in 1858. On the 27d of January, 1867,† the legislature passed an act removing the county seat to Stump’s farm in same county. An adt passed March 4th, 1869,* repealed the act of January 22d, 1867. After the passage of the act of March 4th, 1869, the petitioner, Rachel Cutlip, was indicted for murder in the circuit court of Calhoun county, which court was held at Arnoldsburg.

Philip Reilly, of Ohio county, died in June, 1866. Held: leased, managed, used and disposed of by the trustees, at their dis: cretion, and the net proceeds or profits thereof, or so much of such proceeds or profits as the trustees may think proper, shall be applied to the support of said John and his family, or such of them as the trustees may think proper, in such sums, in such manner,…

J. Calvin Shaffer and William E. Hamilton, partners under the firm name of Shaffer & Hamilton, instituted an action of assumpsit in the circuit court of Ohio county, against Joseph Stringer aud Americus V. McKim, partners doing business under the firm name of Stringer & McKim, and procured a writ of. capias ad satisfaciendum, to be issued, upon which they,'Stringer aud McKim, were arrested, and in order to obtain their release they executed a bond in the penalty of 2,500…

The declaration in this case was filed at April rules, 1865, in the clerk’s office of the circuit court of Monongalia county, by Theodore Ii. Nevin, assignee of E. P. Pitch, against Isaac Scott, George D. Evans, George W. Dorsey, Sr., and William Lazier.

Daniel Steenrod, of Oliio coun(tyydeparted this life in April 1864. At the May term, following, a paper, purporting to be his last will and testament, with four codicils thereto attached, was produced in the circuit court of Ohio county, and, after being duly proved, was admitted to record. Elizabeth S. Thompson and George W. Steenrod were named executrix and executor in the will. At the July rules, 1864, of the same court, Catherine 0.

This case arose in Monongalia county. The declaration was tiled at November rules, 1864, for trespass, alleging that in the year 1864, in that county, the defendants did seize and take away from the plaintiff eight barrels of whisky, of the value of 1,000 dollars. Jacob J. Johnson was the plaintiff, and James T. Hess, John W. Hess and Lewis W. Runner were the defendants.

On the 25th day of August, 1859, Hiram Iiaymond made his negotiable note payable to the order of William Hood, at the Merchants’ Bank of Baltimore, three months after date, for 1022 dollars and 73 cents, which was endorsed by Hood to Thomas F. Conaway, aud by Conaway to William P. Thompson, and was endorsed by said Thompson and discounted bjr the Merchants’ and Mechanics’ Bank of Wheeling, and not being paid, was protested for non payment.

Samuel S. Thompson, Philip P. Dandridge, Bobert M. T. Hunter, and Bobert Ii. Held: and that Edwards be restrained and enjoined from collecting the unpaid bonds due October 1st, 1857.

Zachariah Pumphrey was indebted by bond to Beall Pumphrey, long prior to 1836, and in January, 1838, he purchased, by contract in writing, of John A. Good, about 150 acres of land in Ohio and Marshall counties, for 2000 dollars. He borrowed money to make the first payment, which his sons, William R. and George W. Humphrey, had to pay afterwards.

Eobert McDonald, of Berkeley county, died testate in 1859, leaving a tract of laud of about 121 acres in that- county, devised to bis brother Andrew McDonald for life, and then to his nephew Eobert McDonald, son of Andrew McDonald, in fee, subject to the dower of the testator’s widow. The devisees both died before the testator. The will was proven and admitted to record; it contained a residuary clause devising his estate to his brothers and sisters, share and share alike.

In April, 1867, Levi Low filed his bill in the circuit court of Monongalia county, against Jonathan M. Heck and others, for the purpose of recovering a balance due Low on a contract for the sale of what is known as the “ Low Mill property,” situated in the county of Monongalia.

Adam S. Bales was indicted by the grand jury of the county of Berkeley, at the September term, 1867, for the larceny of three hundred and thirty-nine ivory checks of the value of twenty-five cents each, of'the goods and chattels of Robert D. Chambers. He was found guilty at the same term, and his term of imprisonment fixed at one year in the penitentiary.

The indictment in this case, which was found in June, 1867, is as follows: “The jurors of the State of West Virginia in and for the body of the county of Pocahontas, and now attending the said court, upon their oath present, that on the 3d day of June, 1867, in the said county, and at the circuit court held for the said county, at the court house thereof, on the 3d day of June, 1867, by Nathaniel Harrison, judge of the said court, one Daniel A. Stofer applied to the said…

William Fredrick was, on the 2d day of March, 1869, indicted in the circuit court of Ohio county, for grand larceny.

Joseph Gruber was indicted in the circuit court of Ohio county, on the 6th day of October, 1868, for grand larceny, and on the 8th day of the same month was arraigned, and pleaded not guilty. A jury was elected, tried and sworn to well and truly try, and true deliverance make between the State and the prisoner.

Elihu Gregg was indicted by a grand jury of Preston-■county, on fhe 12th. day of July, 1869, for burning the court bouse of that county, whereby all the records and papers in the clerk’s and recorder’s offices of that county were totally destroyed, and also the dwelling house of one Peter Yoltz.