Volume 32 — Tennessee Reports

This action of ejectment was tried in tbe Circuit Court for Washington county, Luckey, Judge, presiding, when there was judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant appealed in error. argued: The Court, in charging the Jury, rejected the common law doctrine as to what constitutes a navigable river-adopted the civil law definitions, and stated: “But if the stream or river is boatable in its natural state, that is, can be used for the carriage of boats, rafts and other…

At the June term, 1852, of the Circuit Court for Washington county, Alexahdeb, Judge, presiding, Camilla Garland was convicted of murder in the second degree, and judgment rendered accordingly, from which she appealed in error.

This action of ejectment was tried in tbe Circuit Court of Claiborne county, at' its May Term, 1852, AkdeRSON, R. M., presiding, when there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error.

This was an action of slander for words imputing perjury committed by the plaintiff as a witness. To the action the defendant pleaded not guilty, the statute of limitations and justification. On the trial, in support of the plea of justification the defendant read a record of the prosecution on which the plea was predicated.

The facts of this case are fully set forth in the opinion. The judgment from which the plaintiffs appealed in error was rendered at the May Term, 1852, of the Circuit Court for Hawkins county, LuoKet, Judge, presiding. argued:— The second section of the Act of 1850, which applies to suits then pending, is retrospective in its character, and therefore unconstitutional and Void; Wood vs. Orr, 10 Yerg. 505, 501.

This was a bill filed in the Chancery Court at Greene-ville, upon the facts so fully set forth in the ojfin-ion. At the May Term, 184J, the cause was heard, Chancellor Williams presiding., There was a decree for the respondents, and the complainants appealed.

The judgment, to reverse which this writ of error was prosecuted, was rendered at the November Term of the circuit court for Morgan county; Alexaedee, Judge, presiding.

Ibis was an action of ejectment tried in tbe circuit court of Jefferson county, at its December Term, 1851, upon tbe facts stated in tbe opinion. There was a judgment for tbe defendant; Bucket, Judge,' presiding, and tbe plaintiff appealed in error.

Upon the facts fully stated in tbe opinion, tbis action was tried at. tbe November Term, 1851, of tbe circuit court for Rhea county; Keith, Judge, presiding.

This was a bill filed in tbe chancery court at Rutledge upon'tbe facts and for tbe purpose stated in tbe opinion. Tbe Chancellor, IVilliams, decreed for tbe complainant, and tbe respondents appealed.

At the July Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Morgan county, the Grand Jury made the following presentment: “That John Buxton, late of said county, Entry Taker, on the first day of September, eighteen hundred and forty-nine, with force and arms, in the county of Morgan aforesaid, and while he, the said John Buxton, was Entry Taker, in and for the said county of Morgan, and bound to keep and preserve tbe books, records and valuable papers of said office, unlawfully did…

At the March Term, 1851, of the circuit court for Anderson county, Alexander, Judge, presiding, there was judgment in this action of assumpsit, for the plaintiff,' and defendant appealed in error.

This was a motion by the plaintiff to correct the taxation of costs upon the facts stated in the opinion, made in the circuit court of Polk county. At the June Term, 1852, Go on all, Judge, presiding, the motion was overruled, and the plaintiff appealed in error. cited, 1 Oow. P. 422; 3 Ibid. 369.

This was a motion against the defendants in the circuit court of Sevier county, upon the facts stated in the opinion. At the July Term, 1852, the court, Ander-soN, Judge, presiding, overruled the motion and rendered judgment for the defendants, from which the Attorney General, Oaswell, appealed in error.

Tbe facts of tbis case are very fully stated in tbe opinion. At tbe May Term, 1852, of tbe circuit court for Campbell county, ArdersoN, 11.

Bedford was indicted in the circuit court of McMinn county, for retailing liquors to a slave. The indictment was signed by George W. Bridges, the Attorney General, in his official character. Upon the bach of the indictment, the only endorsement was “ Indictment. The State vs. Seth Bedford. A True Bill, William H. Ballew, foreman of the Grand Jury.” From the record it appeared that the indictment had been returned into court endorsed as above stated.

This was a proceeding upon a seire faoias issued in the manner and for the purpose stated in the opinion. At the August Term, 1852, of the circuit court for McMinn county, Goodahl, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendants appealed in error. argued: The scire facias does not show that it was issued by the direction of the court, nor does it show the authority on which it was issued.

The judgment in this ease was rendered in the manner stated in the opinion at the May Term, 1851, of the circuit court for Claiborne county, ANDeesoN, R. M., Judge, presiding. The plaintiff appealed in error. cited 1 Humph. 16; Meigs’ Dig. 1867.

This suit was tried at tbe March Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Cocke county, ANDeesoN, Judge, presiding, when there was judgment for the defendant, and a new trial being refused, the plaintiff appealed in error, insisted that the declarations of Moyers, after he had parted with his interest to Smith, should not be received, and cited Greenl. Ev. §§ 111, 172, 180 ; 1 Stark Ev. 28, and Note A. cited 3 Hayw. 255; Meig’s Dig. 470, 5.

This was au appeal in error from tbe judgment of tbe circuit court of Bledsoe county, at its July Term, 1852; Goodall, Judge, presiding.

<p>Practice. Writ of error. Revivor. Scire facias. If after judgment in an inferior Court, against two or more defendants, one of them die, the surviving defendants may bring a writ of error, and if the administrator of the deceased defendant wishes also to prosecute the writ of error, the proper practice is to suggest and prove the death of his intestate, and thereupon a scire facias will be awarded at the instance of the administrator, uniting the twofold office of a scire facias to revive the decree against the administrator and a scire facias, ad andiendtim errores.</p>

This was an action of Trover in the circuit court of Bradley county. At the September Term, 1851, Keith, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and plaintiff appealed in error. The only facts necessary to be noticed are stated in the opinion. cited M. & Yerg., 287; 5 Yerg., 271; 2 Yer., 337; 6 Tenn. Eep. 123; 9 Mass.

The defendants in error recovered a judgment against Pennington and the plaintiff in error, as stated in the opinion, and executions issued as therein stated. The plaintiff in error, after the levy of the execution upon bis property in Khea comity, upon bis petition obtained writs of certiorari and sivpersedeas for tbe purpose of quashing tbe execution in the circuit court.

The judgment in this case, from Avhich the plaintiff appealed in error, was rendered in the manner and upon the facts stated in the opinion, at the July Term, 1851, of the circuit court for Anderson comity, AlexaNdeb, Judge, presiding.

This was an action of debt instituted in the circuit court of Hawkins county by the Trustees of McMinn Academy against Keneau, George K. Powell and Wm. Miller, upon two bonds executed by Keneau as Treasurer of the .Board of the Academy, the one in 1843, with George K. Powell, W. D. Kenner and Wm. Miller as his sureties; the other in 1844, with Geo. K. Powell, Wm. Miller, J. Miller and H. Tartar as his sureties.

The facts upon, which the court predicated its judgment in this case, are fully stated in the opinion. argued: In this case the levy was made after the death of Peterson; and the deed of trust was in full force at the time of the levy, and none of the property in the-deed of trust had been sold by the trustee; and inasmuch as the title v,to the negro in dispute, was, by the deed of trust, vested in the trustee, aud was not in Peterson, there could be no lien on said negro…

As stated in the opinion, a judgment in this case was rendered against the defendant in the circuit court, from which he appealed in error.

This was a bill filed in the chancery court at Knoxville, attaching the property of defendant Lisby. The bill was dismissed, as stated in tbe opinion, Chancellor WilliaMS, presiding, and the complainant appealed.

<p>Grant. When and to what extent presumed. Adverse possession. Twenty years possession under a claim of ownership is presumptive evidence of a grant. If the party in possession, however, have no paper, title under which he claims, such as deed, title bond, entry or the like, defining his boundaries, his possession will be limited to his actual occupation or enclosures, and it will not be extended by marked lines merely. The same rule applies in such cases as that which governs in the case of an adverse possession under the Act of 1819, ch. 28, § 2.</p>

This was a bill filed by complainants in the chancery court at Kingston, alleging that they had a remainder interest in the property mentioned in that clause of the will of Thomas Brown, quoted in the opinion, and that the widow of Thomas Brown was about to sell or dispose of a portion of the property, to prevent which they prayed the injunctive interposition of the court.

This was an action of covenant instituted in the circuit court of Davidson county, upon tbe facts stated in the opinion. At the June Term, 1852, MaNEy, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error. argued: The covenant is not a guaranty, but a general letter of credit.

The judgment in this case was rendered at the March Term, 1852, of the circuit court 'for Butherford county, DayxdsoN, Judge, presiding. The plaintiff appealed in error. cited 1 ’Williams’ Ex’rs., 569, 570, 572, 596-7; 1 Barn. & Cress. 150; 2 Dowl. & Eyl. 271.

This case was heard at the October Term, 1852, of the chancery court at Clarksville, Chancellor Brien, presiding. A decree was rendered, from which the parties appealed as stated in the opinion. argued: That Greenwood is not a mechcmie, that he was a mere merchant, who sold materials that were used in the erection of the mill, and that the man who furnished the nails, locks and hinges, 'used about the mill, was as much entitled to the mechanics lien as was Greenwood.

This action of ejectment was tried at the February Term, 1851, of the circuit court for Cannon county, SaMuel ANDERSON, Judge, presiding. There was judgment for the '.plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error. cited 8 Yerg., 179; 1 Humph.,' 80 ; 3 Ibid., 129; 7 Ilid., 517; 8 Ibid., 685 ; 1 Murphy’s Bep., 206; 2 Hawk’s B., 568.

This action of detinue was tried in the circuit court of Wilson comity, at its May Term, 1852, Davidson, Judge, presiding. There was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error. cited 10 Yerg. 487; 11 LImnph. 144; 3 Ire. Eq. Hep. 253; 1 Dev. & Bat. 479 ; 2 Hid 115; 2 Dev. Eq. H. 535; 9 Yerg. 64; 8 II). 384; 10 II). 507.

At the July Term, 1851, of the circuit court for Smith county, Cullom, Judge, presiding, there was judgment in this action for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error.

This was an action brought in the manner and upon the facts stated in the opinion, in the circuit court for Bedford county. At the August Term, 1852, DavidsoN, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant appealed in error. insisted that, as it appeared that Harrison and Owens were jointly interested in the stake which was dejDosited by Owens, they should hare sued jointly, and cited 1 Ohitty PL, 13 ; 1 Saun.

Chancellor Ridley, at the February Term, 1852, of the chancery court at Winchester, dismissed this bill, and the complainant appealed. argued: What is the condition of complainants? They are free persons under duress, wrongfully held in bondage ; and must they forever remain in this condition, simply because they are not fortunate enough to have some friend who will take it upon himself to apply to court in his own name, for their emancipation? The very idea is startling.

Tliis action of ejectment was tried in tlie circuit court of Davidson county, at its January Term, 1852, Turner, Judge, presiding, when there was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error.

This was a bill filed, upon the facts and for the purpose stated in the opinion, in the chancery court at Gaines-boro’. At the July Term, 1850, Chancellor Redlev presiding, the bill was dismissed, and the complainant appealed. cited acts of 1J89, ch. 23 § 1; 1835, ch. 5, § 9; 8 Yerg. 186-9; 6 Humph. 481; J Ibid., 394.

This was an action of trespass guare elcmswn fregit tried in the circuit court of Smith, county at its March Term, 1852, Quarles, Judge, presiding.

The judgment in this case was rendered at the February-Term, 1852, of the circuit for Overton, Quaeles, Judge, presiding. The plaintiff appealed in error.

The judgment in this case was rendered, as stated in the opinion, at the August Term, 1851, of the circuit court for DeKalb county, TueNee, Judge, presiding.

Mary II. Bowen’s will contained the clause and codicil quoted in tbe opinion. After the death of the testatrix, Levisa Saunders, one of the legatees, died, having made her last will and testament in which she disposes of the property bequeathed to her in the will of Mary H. Bowen.

The judgment in this case, from which the defendant appealed in error, was rendered at the May Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Davidson county, MaNEY, Judge, presiding.

At tbe March Term, 1852, of tbe circuit court of Smith county, Quaelbs, Judge, presiding, there was judgment rendered in tliis case for the defendants and the plaintiff appealed in error.

This was an action of debt upon the facts stated in the opinion, in the circuit court of Davidson county.

This was an action of assumpsit, upon the facts stated in the opinion, instituted in the circuit court of Davidson county, by Kimbro for the use of John and Jesse Bugg against Hamilton, adm’r., of Benj. Bugg. At the May Term, 1852, Maítey, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and plaintiff appealed in error.

Tbe decree of the circuit court, to reverse which this writ of error was prosecuted, was rendered at the J anuary Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Davidson county, TURNER, Judge, presiding.

The motion made by the defendant, as stated in the opinion, was, at the December Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Bedford county, refused, Davidson, Judge, presiding. The defendant appealed in error. cited 4 Yerg. 561-2; 9 Ibid. 33;.3 Humph. 206; 3 Ire. 549; 1 Chitty PL 12, 13. cited act of 1194, ch. 1, § 1; 1 Humph. 29; 10 Ibid. 468,

Mankin was tried and convicted of the offense of obstructing a public road, and judgment was accordingly rendered against him in the criminal court of Rutherford county, at its May Term, 1852, Turker, Judge, presiding; whereupon he appealed in error.

On the 12th February, 1850, John Tillman conveyed to trustees, for the benefit of certain of his creditors, several tracts of land, seventeen negroes, and the deed proceeds to convey, thus: “ all my stock of cattle, being about fifty bead, eight head of horses, two mule colts, all my stock of hogs, being between sixty and seventy head, one ox wagon, one ox cart, one carryall, all my plantation tools of every description, one sett of blacksmith’s tools, including the bellows,…

The judgment of, the circuit court of Davidson county, in this case, was rendered upon the facts stated in tlie opinion, at the May Term, 1852, Manet, Judge, presiding. The plaintiff appealed in error. cited H&wlcmd vs. Douglas, 2 Johns.

This was a bill filed in tlie chancery court at Lebanon, upon the following facts: Li the will of Cunningham Smith, who died in 1840, are the following provisions: “Item 5th. My will and desire is,’that all of my negroes not otherwise bequeathed, shall be valued and put into lots, and divided amongst all of my children; the one draw-, ing the most valuable lots, to pay over to the less valuable the difference in cash, share and share alike.” “Item Tth.

The circuit court of Franklin county, at its March Term, 1852, Davidson, ¿fridge, presiding, having arrested the judgment in this case, Colyar, Attorney General, pro tern., in behalf of the State, appealed in error.

Upon the trial of this action of ejectment in the yircuit court of Giles county at its August Term, 1852, MaetiN, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error. cited 1 Smith, L. C., 527; 3 Wils., 121; 1 Coxe, 466; 3 Johns. 481; 1 B. Mon., 198, 200. cited 3 Johns. 481; 1 Harr., & Johns., 403.

This was a bill filed in tbe chancery court at Shelby-ville, upon the facts and for the purpose stated in the opinion. At the August Term, 1852, chancellor Kidley presiding, there was a decree for the complainant, and the respondent appealed. cited Eneela/ud vs, Mislef, Meigs 620, 630; McCollum vs. Smith, lb. 342; Sto. Com Laws, §'§ 184, 199. cited Sto. Confl.

Tbe prisoner, a slave, tbe property of R. H. Hyde, was indicted in tbe criminal court of Rutherford county, for tbe murder of Sam, a slave, tbe property of R. H. Spann. Held: he had a cut across his bowels some three, four or five inches long.

At the July Term, 1852, of the circuit court of Franklin county, DavidsoN, Judge, presiding, the indictment against the defendant was quashed and judgment rendered accordingly, whereupon P. Turkey, Attorney General pro iem., in behalf of the State appealed in error.

This action was tried upon the facts stated in the opinion, at the March Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Williamson county, Maney, Judge, presiding.

At tbe July Term, 1852, of tbe circuit court of Erank-lin county, MaeohbaNks, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for tbe defendants upon their demurrer to tbe scire facias, issued as stated in tbe opinion, from which tbe plaintiff appealed in error.

Tbe judgment in this case was rendered at tbe July Term, 1851, of tbe circuit court for Franklin county, for tbe plaintiff, and tbe defendants prosecuted a writ of error. cited Bac. Abr., Baron and Feme, L; 7 ITumpb., 236, 255.

This was an action of assumpsit in the circuit court of Franklin county. To the plaintiff’s declaration the defendant demurred, and the demurrer being sustained, the plaintiff appealed in error. cited 1 Pick. 224; 5 Ibid, 290; 9 Ibid, 614; 12 Ibid, 120; .Bac. Abr. Tenancy; 1 Swan, 385. cited Pa/rker vs. Elder, II Humph. 549.

The defendant was presented for the offense of gaming, and upon the facts stated in the opinion, was convicted, and judgment accordingly rendered against him in tbe circuit court for Giles comity, at its April Term, 1852, Martin, Judge, presiding; whereupon be appealed in error.

This was a bill filed in the chancery court at Nashville, upon the facts and for the purpose stated in the opinion. At the November Term, 1851, there was a decree for the respondent, and the complainant appealed.

Upon tbe special verdict rendered in tbis case, and. which is set out in the opinion, the circuit court for Maury county, at the May Term, 1852, Martin, Judge, presiding, rendered judgment against the defendant, and he appealed in error. cited The State vs. Smith, Meigs’ Rep. 101, as defining gaming, and the following authorities to show that the facts stated in the special verdict do not bring this case within the definition of the offense as stated in The State vs. Smith;…

This was an action of trover, tried in the circuit court of Davidson county, at its September Term, 1852, Bax-tee, Judge, presiding. There was judgment for the defendant and the plaintiff appealed in error. cited Overton vs. Perkms, 10 Terg., 828 ; Oo/rroll vs. Fields, 6 Yerg., 809 ; Lester’s case, 4 Humph., 383.

This was an action tried, upon the facts stated in the opinion, at the February Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Sumner county, Manet, Judge, presiding. There was judgment for the defendant and the plaintiff appealed in error.

This was an action of debt, commenced in the circuit court of Franklin county, by D. L. Morrison, against P. S. Declierd. The declaration contained three counts. The first, was for “so much money had and received,” There were verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error.

Upon the facts stated in the opinion, the circuit court of Fentress county, at its October Term, 1852, Goodall, Judge, presiding, gave judgment for the defendant, from which the State, by Attorney General, Ekien, appealed in error.

This was an action of debt brought in the circuit court of Lincoln county, to recover the price paid for a slave. At the November Term, 1852, Luoicey, Judge, presiding, there was a trial, and verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error. cited 1 Greenl. Ev., § 397, and Notes; 1 Phil. Ev., 3d Am. Ed., 108-9.

This was au action in tbe circuit court of Davidson county, upon tbe facts stated in tbe opinion. At the January Term, 1852, Tuenee, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for tbe plaintiff, and tbe defendant appealed in error. cited 8 Smedes & Mar., J54; 3 Serg. & Rawle, 541; 13 Penn. State Rep., (1 Harris,) 495; 2 Plumph. 388. cited Foust vs. Wilson, 3 Humph.; 31, 33.

The complainant, upon tbe facts stated in tbe opinion, filed this bill in tbe chancery court at Eranklin. At tbe December Term, 1852, chancellor BrieN, presiding, there was a decree excluding William S. Morton, tbe son of William E. Morton, from any participation in tbe division of tbe Gilchrist farm; and from this decree William S. Morton appealed.

The opinion states tbe purposes for which the bill in this case was filed. The decree from which the respondents appealed was rendered at the February Term, 1852, of the chancery court at Fayetteville.

December 3, 1838, tbe following bond was executed by tbe parties thereto: “ I, Wallis Estill, chairman of the county court of Franklin county, by the direction of court, in their behalf, do hereby bind John F. Thomas, ian orphan of the age of eleven years, to Joshua Gore, witli him to live and work as an apprentice, until he attains the age of twenty-one years’ old; during which time, the said John F. Thomas shall obey the lawful commands, and faithfully serve the said…

This was a proceeding in the manner stated in the opinion, in the circuit court of Eentress county. At the February Term, 1852, Quashes, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendants, and attorney general Beieh, in behalf of the State, appealed in error.

Primm presented bis petition for writs of certiorari and supersedeas, (containing tlie reasons stated^J-n the opinion why be bad not appealed) to for Williamson county, at its March TeimffleÉfé, whicnr being granted and tbe case removed ii¿^ court, a trial was bad, MaNey, Judge, ^residing, when there was judgment for Primm and Allen Jfejtjjj error. cited 4 Hayw., 100, 143; 2 Tenn., 179; 3 Humph., 137, 148. cited 2 Tenn., 108; 3 Humph., 145; 5 Hid., 146.

This was a judgment rendered upon the facts stated in the opinion, at the April Term, 1852, of the chancery court at Gallatin, Chancellor Ridley, presiding; from which the defendants appealed. argued: It has been decided by this court in the case of Deaderiek vs. Smith, 6 Ilumph., 146, that the court has the power to enforce its own decrees; that it has under its control all the sales made by its order until a final disposition is made of the cause; that the purchaser at a…

This was an action of debt, as stated in the opinion, instituted in the circuit court of Davidson county. At the June Term, 1852, Maney, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error. cited Sto. Bailments, §§ 124, 130, 620-1; 1 Mason’s Bep., 100-1.

This was an action, of debt in which verdict and judgment were rendered, as stated in the opinion, for the defendant, at the June Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Davidson county, Maney,. Judge, presiding. cited Graham New Trials, 96; 6 Greenl. Bep., 140; 5 New Ham., 91; 12 Ibid, 474; 5 Pick. Bep., 296. cited 19 Maine Bep., 303; 30 Ibid, 9; 8 Yerg. 507 ; 4 Humph., 38.

Upon tbe bearing of tbe bill filed in tbis case in tbe chancery 'court at Lebanon, chancellor Ridley, at tbe January Term, 1853, decreed as stated in tbe opinion; whereupon, tbe respondent appealed. cited tbe various statutes exempting property from execution, and insisted that tbe widow is entitled only to tbe articles exempted by tbe Act of 1842, ch. 42, § 2, unless it appear that tbe husband’s estate is insolvent. cited 9 ILumpb., 179; 1 Humph., 390; Meigs’ Dig. § 968.

Upon tbe facts agreed, wbicli are stated in tbe opinion, a judgment was rendered in this case in favor of tbe State, at tbe May Term, 1852, of tbe circuit court for Wilson county, DavidsoN, Judge, presiding; tbe defendant appealed in error.

This was an. action of replevin in tbe circuit court of Maury county.

This was an. action instituted in tbe circuit court of Davidson county, upon tbe facts stated in tbe opinion At tbe May Term, 1852, Mamey, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed in error. argued that Mrs. Whyte was not the owner of the property as tenant in dower, and that the notice should have been given both to the tenant in dower and to the heirs; and if the notice ■was properly given to Mrs. Whyte, it should have been…

Tin's was a motion to correct tbe taxation of costs, in tlie circuit court for Smith county. At the November Term, 1852, Goodall, Judge, presiding, there was judgment on the motion for the defendant, and the Attorney General, BbieN, in behalf of the State, appealed in error.

This was a bill filed in the chancery court at Galla-tin, for the purpose, and upon the facts stated in the opinion. At the October Term; 1852, Chancellor Ridley, presiding, there was a decree for respondent Montgomery, from which the complainants appealed. cited 5 Johns. Oh. Rep., 283; 10 Yerg., 263; 5 Humph., 474; Hill on Trustees, 314; 1 Atkyn’s Rep., 356 ; 4 Ves., 79; 1 Sch. & Lefr., 341; 1 Ves. Junr., 297. Montgomery, cited 1 Sto.

McElratb was indicted, as stated in tbe opinion, for tbe murder of Bobert II. Peyton. At tbe February Term, 1852, of tbe circuit court of Sumner county, Manet, Judge, presiding, be was convicted of manslaughter, and sentenced to ten years imprisonment in tbe penitentiary, from which judgment be appealed in error.

Tbis was an action of covenant in the circuit court of Montgomery county. At the September Term, 1852, Pepper, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error.

This was an action of trover, in the circuit court of Maury county. At the September Term, 1852, Maetin, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error. cited 8 Humph., 563, 568; 9 Humph. 546; 2 Johns. Hep. 221; 1 Grreenl. Ev., §§ 523, 526; 1 Ld. Haym., J30.

The prisoner was convicted at the February Term, 1852, of the circuit court of Dickson county, Pepper, Judge, presiding; and sentence of death pronounced upon him, whereupon he appealed in error. said: Although 1 have been unable to find, in any of the books, the reason of the distinction which is made between the perpetration of the offence of rape, when committed by force, and the same moral offense, when comitted by fraudulent deception of the female; yet, the cases in…

The judgment, from which tbe prisoner appealed in error, was rendered, upon the special verdict quoted in the opinion, at the May Term, 1852, of the circuit eourt for Maury county, MaetiN, Judge, presiding. argued: Suppose the court should be of opinion that tbe defendant did tempt and persuade the slave to leave the service of his owners, still tbe verdict does not find that be did it with tbe ■intent or design of depriving tbe true owner thereof; and notwithstanding tbe…

This was an action of ejectment commenced in the circuit court of Davidson county. At the September Term, 1851, Manet, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiffs appealed in error.

This was a proceeding in tlie circuit court of Coffee county, as stated in tbe opinion. At tbe January Term, 1853, MaechbanKS, Judge, presiding, tbe judgment was rendered, from wbicb tbe defendant appealed in error. argued, that' tbe judgment did not sufficiently show, as it should, tbe grounds of tbe removal of tbe clerk, and proceeded: It may be said that tbe cause is improperly here; that an appeal does not lie to this court, in such case.

This, was a proceeding in tbe circuit court of Davidson county, upon the facts and for tbe purpose stated in the opinion.

This judgment was rendered, as stated in the opinion, at the May Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Davidson county, Manet, Judge, presiding. The defendant appealed in error.

This was a bill filed in the chancery court at Franklin, upon the facts, and for the purposes stated in the opinion.

This was an issue of devismit vel non in the circuit court of Bedford county.

This was an action of covenant in tbe circuit court' of Kutherford county. At the March Term, 1852, Davidson, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant and the plaintiff appealed in error. cited, 4 Humph., 22; 10 Ibid, 234; 1 Phil. Ev., 326; 3 lb., 815, note 569, 817 note 570; 3 Yerger, 403; 1 Greenleaf Ev., § 553. cited, 10 Yerg., 34-5; 10 Humph., 234; 1 Green!. Ev., §§ 527, 538-9.

This was a bill filed in tbe chancery court at Nashville for the purpose stated in the opinion. At the November Term, 1851, Chancellor Beien, presiding, there was a decree for the respondents and the complainants appealed in error.

The prisoner was indicted in the circuit court of Franklin county, for murder. At the April Term, 1852, Maech-banks, Judge, presiding, there was a trial, and verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree, and fixing the period of imprisonment in the Penitentiary, at twenty-one years., ■ A new trial being refused, the prisoner appealed in error.

This was a petition presented , to the chancery court at Nashville stating the facts and for the purpose mentioned in the opinion. At the November Term, 1851, Chancellor BrieN, presiding, there was a decree for the respondent and the petitioner appealed.

The defendant was arraigned before a Justice of the Peace under the “small offense law,” and fined for the commission of an “assault,” as charged in the warrant. Subsequently he was indicted in the circuit court for an assault and battery, to which indictment he pleaded the former conviction of the assault.

The facts of this case are fully stated in tbe opinion. The judgment from which the plaintiff appealed in error, was rendered at the July Term, 1852, of the circuit court for Humphreys county, Peppee, Judge, presiding.

This was a proceeding in the circuit court of Rutherford county, of the character stated in the opinion. At the March Term, 1852, Turner, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error. ■

This was an action of replevin in the circuit court of Rutherford county. At the November Term, 1852, DavidsoN, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant appealed in error.

This bill was filed in tlie chancery court at Nashville upon tlie facts and for the purpose stated in the opinion.

This was a bill filed in the chancery court at Gallatin. At the October Term, 1852, Chancellor Ridley, presiding, there was a decree for the respondents, and the complainants appealed.

These were bills filed in the chancery court at Gal-latin. upon the facts and for the purposes stated in the opinion. Decrees ' and orders were made therein and appeals taken therefrom as is also stated in the opinion.

At the February Term, 1852, of the circuit court of Lawrence county, Waluer, Judge, presiding, there was judgment in this case, upon the facts set forth in the opinion, for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error.

This was a bill filed in the chancery court at Gal-latin by the complainant to assert the lien which he alleged had accrued in his favor under the statute of 1846, cli. 118, § 2. The complainant did tbe work for which ho seeks to obtain compensation as a journeyman stone cutter, having been employed to do so by Lewis Crump, the respondent’s intestate, who had undertaken to build a family vault upon a contract with the executors of Isaac Franklin, deceased.

Upon the facts stated in the opinion, the circuit court of DeKalb county, Cullom, Judge, presiding, at its December Term, 1851, rendered the judgment from which the plaintiff in error, appealed.

Upon the facts stated in the opinion, the circuit court of Hickman county, at its October Term, 1852, Walker, Judge, presiding, rendered judgment for the defendant, from which the plaintiff appealed in error.

This was a bill filed in the chancery court at PulasM. At a special term of the court in March, 1852, chan-eellor Beiek, presiding, there was a decree for tbe complainant and tbe respondent appealed.

The bill filed in this case, in the chancery court at Pulaski, at the August Term, 1852, Chancellor BrieN, presiding, was dismissed, and the complainant appealed.

At the October Term, 1852, of the circuit court of White county, Goodall., Judge, presiding, Mitchell was convicted, as stated in the opinion, and he thereupon appealed in error.

At the January Term, 1852, of tbe circuit court of Davidson county, TubNee, Judge, presiding, there was judgment in tbis case for tbe plaintiff, tbe defendants appealed in error, and tbe plaintiff prosecuted a writ of error. argued: It may be considered doubtful whether there can be two replications even to an ordinary plea of set-off. See Cbitty’s PL, 582.

This was a bill filed in tbe chancery court at Cartilage, by Dice, tbe complainant, to invalidate a sale of -lands, made in tbe manner stated in tbe opinion. At tbe February Term, 1852, Chancellor Eidley, presiding, tbe bill was dismissed, and tbe complainant appealed.

This was an action of ejectment in the circuit court of Macon county. At the November Term, 1852, Goodall, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant appealed in error.

This was an action of debt in tbe common law and chancery court of tbe city of Memphis. At the November Term, 1853, Habéis, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiffs appealed in error. cited Ohitty on Bills, 7th Am. Ed., 417; 1 Qreenleaf on Evi., § 384 ; Bayley on Bills, 2 Am. Ed., 394; Bailey et als. vs. {Joehran et als., 5 Humph., 401.

The prisoners, two slaves, were indicted and convicted of tbe murder of tlieir master, at tbe February Term, 1853, of tbe circuit court of Weakley county, Fitzgerald, Judge, presiding. From tbe sentence of death pronounced upon them, they appealed in error.

This was a petition filed in the circuit court of Carroll county, by John Stewart, against his wife, Mary Stewart. The petition, upon the proof, and for the reason stated in the opinion, was dismissed, Fitzgerald, Judge, presiding, at the December Term, 1852; whereupon, the petitioner appealed.

This was an action of debt, commenced in the common law and chancery court of the city of Memphis. At the March Term, 1852, HaeRis, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error. argued: A party who contracts to sell land, should have the legal title, or the means of enforcing it.

This was an action of ejectment in the circuit court of Dyer county, brought by the lessee of the University of Nashville, formerly Cumberland College.

This was an action of assumpsit in the circuit court of Hardeman county. At the October Term, 1852, Hum-phreys, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant appealed in error. cited. Eal&vn, vs. Ha/rrison, 4 McCord, 249; Byrd vs. Boyd, IK, 246.

Pope was indicted in the circuit court of Carroll county, for retailing liquors without license. At the August Term, 1852, Fitzgerald, Judge, presiding, lie was convicted, and judgment pronounced against him; whereupon, he appealed in error.

This was an action of debt, as stated in the opinion, brought in the circuit court of Perry county. At the May Term, 1851, Walker, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and Attorney General Hill, in behalf of the plaintiff, appealed in error. cited 5 Ire. Bep., 129; II)., 227.

This was a bill filed in tbe chancery court at Trenton, upon tbe fact and for tbe purpose stated in tbe opinion.

This was an indictment in the circuit court of Perry county. At the May Term, 1860, Martin, Judge, presiding, judgment was rendered as stated in the opinion, and Attorney General TIill, in behalf of the State, appealed in error.

The • defendant was presented by tbe grand jury of 'Gibson county, for giving spirituous liquors to a slave. At tbe July Term of the circuit court for that county. Fitzgerald, Judge, presiding, tlie presentment was quashed, and tbe Attorney General, in bebalf of tbe State, appealed in error.

This was an action of debt in tbe common law and chancery court of the city of Memphis.

This was a proceeding of the character stated in the opinion, in the circuit court of Haywood county.

This was an action of debt in the circuit court of Haywood county. At the June Term, 1852, Read, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error. argued: A demurrer was proper.

This was an action of ejectment in the circuit court of Dyer county. At the October Term, 1852, Read, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error. cited 2 Humph., 409; 11 II., 592; 1 Swan, 312.

This was an action of debt in the circuit court of Dyer county. At the June Term, 1852, Read, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for tbe plaintiffs and the defendant appealed in error. cited 1 Swan, 62; II. 258. cited 2 Hill 210; 3 U. S. Dig., 418; 6 New Iiamp., 35; 20 Johns. R., 137; 36 Eng. Com. Law R., 443.

This was a bill filed in tbe chancery court at Trenton, upon tbe facts and for tbe purpose stated in tbe opinion.

This was an action of ejectment in the circuit court of Obion county. At the February Term, 1853, Fitzgerald, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error.

Tbis was an action of assumpsit in the common law and chancery court of the city of Memphis. As stated in the opinion the material facts will be found' in the report of this case in 10 Humph., 470. At the November Term, 1852, Haeeis, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendants and the plaintiff appealed in error.

This was an action of replevin in the common law and chancery court of the city of Memphis. At the March Term, 1853, Habéis, Judge, presiding, there was judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed in error. argued: That Boyd had an unquestionable right at the time of the attachment levied, to retain the goods until the price was paid or tendered, not in virtue of the right of stoppage in transitu, but on the higher and older doctrine of lien for the price.

The judgment of the circuit court of Shelby county, in this case, from which the plaintiff prosecuted a writ, of error, was rendered at the May Term, 1852, Hum-pkreys, Judge, presiding.

Tlte prisoner was indicted in tlie circuit court of Shelby county. The venue was changed to Fayette county, and at the February Term, 1853, of the circuit court for that county, Humphreys, Judge, presiding, there were verdict and judgmeut against the prisoner, and he appealed in error.