Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

3. THE ATLANTA WEEKLY S TT_N« THE DAILY SUN. supreme Wednesday Morning September G. Henry UIcws. COURT DECISIONS, claims against him, except certain specific liens, and the homestead and exemption provisions of the Constitution of 18G8 do not create snch a specific lien upon the title, to his family, ns may be heard or The last number of the New York Leader is getting “clues to Clews'’—in other words, is after Henry Clews, Gov. Bullock’s Financial Agent in New York, and, we believe also, the Financial Agent of the United States Government. The Leader speaks of him as “>ne of the most distinguished Republican lead ers” in New Yoi'k—a “boon companion of President Grant,” and “one of Tom. Murpbey’s adviser?.” who “boasts of mjs eiious inter tie.vs with the. Secretary of the Treasury, 1 ' and does not “hesitate to denounce the hypocrisy of the De mocracy,” &c. He resided in* New York during the war, and was intensely loyal to the U, S. He gambled in stocks, bulled gold, and was a “cunning, wideawake Wall street gambler” all tlio time. He was a foreigner bom—declared his intention to become a citizen of the U. S. on the 27th of Dec., 1854, and by the laws of naturalization was entitled to fnll citizenship in I860 — still lie did not perfect liis naturalization, or vote, •or exercise any of the privileges of citizenship, all during the war—did not even volunteer in the Union service or place himself within the reach of Lin ton’s drafts and conscriptions, but remain ed a foreigner; and it was only on the 8th day of May, 18G5, that he completed Iris naturalization and took the oath to sup port the Constitution of the United States. The Leader adds : Twelve eventful years an alien !’ There can be only one answer to the Clews conundrums above put. Henry Clews, like the cunning, crafty, wide awake Wall street gambler that he is, was waiting to see whether the South would win or tho North. Like the true Wall street gambler, he wanted to be on the winning side. And he didn’t wish to be drafted. Will he who now wishes so much information have any objection to giving a fnll account of'the interview between himself and the provost marshal while the draft was go ing on, and to answering whether or not he pleaded alienage as a reason why he could not be drafted? He postponed •lus full naturalization five years longer ±ban was necessary. In short, not until Richmond was taken, and the Southern rebellion had collapsed, did he appear in the neglected Court of Common Pleas and become a citizen of the United States. As Squecrs would say, “Here’s richness.” .September 5, 1871. Willis Wood et ak, vs. A. B. Ko3s, Adm’r. Motion for new trial. i - . • . . , . O J | in tbe St;it6 courts, When in a trial in the court below, the j thej iKinkruptcyjuoceedings. Whether right of certain claimants to property was predicated npon their rights as announces The Court-Journal that tlic Queen “has to fill two vacancies in the Garter,” Mostladie3 have to do the same thing every morning. The Bridgeport, Conn., Farmer says: “Jefferson, with an instinctive sense of propriety befitting tho high station of President, refused during his eight years’ term to appoint any of his relations to office, however worthy and eminent. If this was the only thing in which Grant is unlike what Jefferson was, the nation •coukl bear with him ; but alas! he is un like Jefferson in every particular. One hundred thousand Irishmen in procession, iu the city of Dublin, as was the case last Sunday, gives plausibil ity to the recent prophecy that the pres ent generation will witness an Irish Par liament in session in Dublin. That was a grand Fenian demonstration; yet what could England have done to prevent it? An army of fifty thousand British sol diers quartered in the Irish capital would hardly have been able to suppress the demonstration without bloodshed. A Naked Usurpation. Senator Schivrz in his speech at Chi cago denounced the bayonet law as a “naked usurpation” of power by a cor rupt Congress. Here are his words, the deliberate utterance of one of the ablest leaders of the Republican party: “There stands the naked usurpation. No public danger provoked it; no public interest was served by it; no public voice called for it. The honor of the country would have been far better guarded without it. Not the shadow of a valid justification excuses it. A naked act of usurpation, performed merely to further a FAVOURITE SCHEME of tho White House. And for this the Constitution was violated, and the peace of tho country endangered. And can such nil act pass without the most ener getic opposition of Congress, and without emphatic public demonstration? It would almost seem so. And more than this, the same officer of the government who ttas GUILTY OF THIS ACT j • is held up by a great many as the man above all others to be reinvested with the power mid honor of tbe National Execu tive. Do you know what that means? Wo are living in a country where pre cedent often, but too often, acquires the authority of law and constitution rule What is a mere fact to-day is apt to be looked upon as law to-morrow. If this act of usurpation passes without AUTHORITATIVE CENSURE, thus passing as a precedent into our his tory, future Presidents and other syco phants will find thcreiu sufficient proof that a President may arrogate to himself such a po wer, for President Grant had done so, and not only done so with im punity, but tbe American people after he had done so, bad again rewarded him with the highest honors of the republic. And w! iat will that signify ? That hence forward a mod flagrant and wilful breach of the Constitution by a President will bo considered no reason why the same position of trust and power should not be confided to him again. And, when the Republican party will meet in national convention, to select a candidate for the Presidency, the ques tion will not merely be, do we prefer this man to any other that is mentioned ? bat the question will be, are wo prepared to sanction EXECUTIVE USURPATION ? grand-children of the deceased, and there were several witnesses examined as to their paternity, and tbe evidence sup ports the verdict of the jury, and no rule of law was violated in siibmittiDg the case to the jury, and the judge below re fused a new trial, this Court will not in terfere to set aside the judgment of the Court. . . . ,, When a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence was overruled by the court below, and the evidence does not accompany the motion, and the character of the evidence sug gested l>y tho movant is cumulative, merely, it is not error in the court below to refuse a new trial. Judgment affirmed. Charles A. Nutting et ah, vs. J. M. Boardman et al. Joinder of parties. LOCHRANE, C. J. Where a bill was filed by the heirs at law against the administrator and the parties to whom he had sold railroad stock, property of the estate, to recover back said stock, which had been sold by such administrator without an order of the Court of Ordinary, and the parties who were the purchasers and defend ants answered the bill, and in their answer prayed that the securities of the administrator be made parties to the suit, and to which answer a demurrer was filed and sustained, and the Court dis missed such cross bill: Held, That the administrator and his securities were bound to respond for any devastavit by the administrator of the assets of the estate, to the heirs at law or creditors of said estate. But in an action brought by the heirs at law, or bill filed by them, to recover back property sold illegally by the adminis trator, from the purchasers, the securities on tbe administrator’s bond cannot be made parties thereto at the iustance of such purchasers. Judgment affirmed. Swift, Hamburger & Co. vs. A. H. Powell —Speculation upon Chances. LOCHRANE, J. Where A agreed with B to deliver a hundred bales of cotton, at twenty-one cents a pound, at any time within sixty days, and B knew that A expected to pur chase himself to fulfill his contract, and the contract was reduced to writing, and recited “for value received,” and the parties further agreed to put up a thou sand dollars each, which they did, to cover losses from non-compliance with such contract: ■ Held, That inasmuch as the original contract was reduced to writing, and re cited a consideration, these wassuffipient under the facts to take the contract out of the illegality of such contracts, under Section 2596 of the Code; that the thou sand dollars put up by each party are to befregarded as stipulated damages, and tbat the plaintiff could recover no more than this amount in his action. Where the Court, upon tbe trial below, from a misconception of the case, misdi rected the jury and admitted illegal evi dence as to consequential damages, but upon motion granted a new trial: Held, It was no error in the Court be low to have granted a new trial, especial ly as the amount was for an amount not authorized by law. Judgment affirmed. William J. Pierce, etal., vs. W. H> de- Graffenreid—Claim—Homestead. McKAY, J. Where one who was not in fact the head of a family applied for a homestead as such, under the act of 1868, and the same was laid off to him, and being in possession thereof, it was levied upon to satisfy a fi. fa. against him, and he dying the homestead was claimed by his 'heirs at law: Held, It was not error in the Court to reject the record of the Court of Ordina- ry, setting apart the land as a homestead, the claimants not pretending that they claimed under the family of the deceased. In a claim case, where the defendant is in possession, the claimant cannot defect the plaintiff in fi. fa. by showing title in a third person not a party to the record. Judgment affirmed. Patrick Kerwin vs. James and Cum mings.—Proceedings against tenant. McKAY, J. WhereK. rented the premises of C. by the month, commenc ing on the 7th day of May, with the un derstanding that he would occupy them until October; and the agent of 0., who made the contract, testified that the renting was only that the 1st October, but there was also evidence to-wit: The re gular receipt of the rent monthly, that the renting might have been until the 7th: Held whether the renting was to the 1st or the 7th, was a question of fact for the jury, and they having found for the plaintiff, and the Court having refused a new trial, this Court will not under the facts set forth in the record, disturb the judgment of the Court, refusing a new trial. Judgment affirmed. E. and S. Collins vs, A. P. and O. C. Collins, Aecutors.—Relief act of1870. Negro consideration. McKAY, J. Wherein 1863, A. soid to B. two negro slaves for §5000 payable in pork at one dollar a pound, and cotton at fifty cents pound, but no note was given, and soon after §2000 was paid in pork, and after wards A. having died, his executors after the 1st of June, 1865, adjusted the debt with B., fixing the amount of the debt at §1,700, part of which was then paid, and B’s note with C. as security, was taken for the balance: Held that this was not a mere renewal of the old debt, so as to bring it under tbe acts of 1868 and 1870, but as there was in act no new consideration, the consideration of the note was still slaves, and it was error in the Court to charge the jury that this was such a noratiou cf the contract as purged it of its negro con sideration. When there was evidence on one side that the consideration of the note was the price of slaves, aDd on the other side, that it was given for cotton, it was the duty of the Court to charge the jury as to the law, arising under the evidence on both sides. Judgment reversed, Gertrude J. Woolf oik, vs. Joseph E. Mur ray. Homestead of Bankrupt McKAY, J. * Where the United States Court, under tlm Bankrupt act of 1867, have acquired jurisdiction of the estate of a bankrupt, the State courts lose jurisdiction of all such claim is such a one as may be proven in bankruptcy before the Federal Court, is a question for that court alone to de cide. Judgment affirmed. Lavinia Williams, etui. vs. O. F. Adams. Eiectment. defective record of deed. WARNER, J. Thi3 was an action of ejectment to re cover a lot in the city of Macon. On the trial of the case the plaintiff introduced in evidence a deed to the lot, from Mar tha Wiliams, dated the 11th of March, 1851, and recorded 7th April, 1854; also the deed from Martha Williams to de fendant, dated 21st August, I860, and re corded the 28th, and proved the defend ant in possession of the land. The main question iu the case turned on the effect of the record of the prior deed. Thai deed was recorded with the names of only two of the subscribing wit nesses, neither of whom was a. judicial officer, and there was no probate of the deed by the others. There now ap pears on .the face of the deed three sub scribing witnesses, one of whom sub scribes his name as a notary public, which the clerk failed to record when he record ed the deed, and the question is whether tbe record of the prior deed, as the same appeared on the record, was snch notice under the law as will defeat the title of the defendant as a subsequent purchaser from Mrs. Williams. The point'in the case is, whether an irregular registration of a deed is notice to a subsequent pur chaser w hose deed has been regularly re corded according to law. The Court be low decided_it was not, and so charged the jury; a verdict was found tor the de fendant. The plaintiff excepted to the charge of the Court, and also moved for a new trial, on the ground of surprise and newly discovered evidence; that one of the witnesses to the deed would swear that the witness who had attested the deed as Notary Public, subscribed his name thereto at the time of its execution, and that the clerk had failed so to record ib This motion was overruled, and the plaintiff excepted. The 2663d section of the Code declares that “every deed con veying lands shall be recorded in the of fice of the Clerk of the Superior Court qf the county where the land lies, within one year from the date of such deed. On failure to record within this time the re cord may be made at any time thereafter, but such deed loses its priority over a subsequent deed from the same vendor recorded in time and taken without no tice of the existence of the first.” This section of the Code is in substance the same in its legal effect as the act of 1837. The question in the case is whether a prior deed from Mrs. Williams, never hav ing been recorded within twelve months from the date thereof, and when record ed the record thereof did not show that its execution had been attested as requir ed by law, so as to admit the same to probate, was legal notice to the defend ant as a subsequent purchaser from her. The defendant was only bound to know what the record discloses, and the record shows that the deed had been recorded without any lawful authority to do so. This Court held, 11th Ga. R., p. 637, that the irregular registration of a deed was no notice. There was no .error in the charge of the Court *in this case, or in refusing the new trial. The newly discovered evi dence will not alter the evidence as it ex isted at the time the defendant purchas ed the lot. Judgment affirmed. P. W. Doyle and Jas. Martin, sheriff, vs, the Trustees of the African Methodist Church and of the Methodist Episcopal Church South in Equity. WARNER, J. This is a bill filed to set aside the sale of a city lot in Macon, on the ground of alleged fraud byMartin, the sheriff, and the purchaser and also because of unfair ness in the sale, the inadequacy of the price paid for the proprety, and that the title to the lot had not passed to the purchaser. The lot was sold on the following agreement: “The above case, ofter stating it,^“is settled on the follow ing terms to-wit: The lot of land in dispute shall he sold by the sheriff of Bibb County on the 1st Tuesday in Feb- uary next, after advertising the same once a week iu the Telegraph and Mes- senBer, until the day of sale.' The' terms of the sale cash ; after payment of costs and expenses of sale, the balance of the money arising from the sale, to be divid ed equally between the Method^; Epis vWfriean copal church South, and the" church.” Signed by the counsel of both parties, whereupon the following order was entered upon the minutes of The Court. “November term, 1869—ordered that the above settlement be, and it is hereby made the judgment of the Court. On the trial of the c ause, evidence was introduced on both sides as to the fainess or unfairness of the sale, and as to the conduct of the sheriff and purchaser. The Court charged the jury that this was not a judicial sale under execution, and that the law of the State' covering judicial sales was inapplicable to said sale, and that in a sale under this order, the confirmation by the courbwas necessary to make it valid and there being no such confirmation, you should set aside the sale, and decree the deed to he given up to he canceled, to which charge the de fendants excepted. The jury returned a verdict setting aside the sale and ordering a new sale, and further found that no fraud was proven between the purchaser and sheriff, but decreed-that the deed to Doyle be rendered up, and canceled. The defendants moved the court to set aside the verdict on the ground that it was against law and evidence, which motion the coart overruled and defendants ex cepted, Admitting there was no fraud proven between Doyle and the sheriff, there is sufficient evidence in the record, inde pendent of that fact, in relation to the sale of the property, to sustain the ver dict. This was not a judicial sale by the sheriff, acting in his official capacity, even if there had been an order of the Court ordering him to sell the property, and authorizing him to make a title thereto to the purchaser thereof. In our judgment there was no error of the Court in ordering the property to be sold. There was an agreement of the parties that the property should be sold by the sheriff, and the terms thereof, in settlement of the snit pending between them, and that settlement was made the judgment of the Court, and that is all. The parties by agreement could not con fer upon the sheriff tbe authority to sell the property, and to convey title thereto to the purchaser without an order of said Court to that effect. The judgment of the Court confirming the settlement is one thiDg. The order and judgment of Court ordering the sale of the property in pursuance of that settlement, and con veying a title thereto, is another. A very important question, so far as the ques tion of the purchaser is concerned under such sale. Whenever a Court, by its judgment, shall order a sale of property in pursu ance of an agreement of parties, then it will be the duty of the Court to see to it that tlie sale has been made and the title to the property executed in accordance with its order and judgment, especially if any objection shall be made thereto by the parties interested. In view of the facts of the record, the verdict of the jury setting aside the sale of the city lot was right, and there was error in the Court refusing to set the verdict aside. Judgment affirmed. B. A. Thornton, Receiver, vs. T. F. Gib- WARNER, J. son. Question of fact fob the jury. This was an action brought by the plaintiff as receiver of the estate of Rals ton against defendant, to recover some §500, alleged to be due the estate of Ralston for the rent of a storehouse in Macon. The defendants pleaded that at the time the storehouse was rented, there was a co-partnership existing between the plaintiff in his indi vidual capacity and the defendant and one Aurelius Gibson, to do- business as merchants iu Macon, which partner ship was afterwards dissolved. On the trial of the case, after the- plaintiff had closed his evidence, the defendant de murred thereto and moved for a nonsuit, on the ground that the plaintiff’s evi dence showed the existence of a partner ship as alleged by the defendant, at the time the storehouse was rented. The Court granted the nonsuit and the plain tiff excepted This was a demurrer to the plaintiff’s evidence, and the question for the decis ion of the Court upon that demurrer was not as to the preponderance of the evi dence in favor of the partnership, but the question ior the decision of the Court was whether there was any evidence de nying the existence of the partnership at the time the storehouse was rented. If there was any evidence on which the jury could have found that there was no partnership, then they should have been allowed to consider and pass upon that evidence. 15 Ga. R., p. 491.. 5- Ga. R., 172. Thornton states in his answer that there was a proposition made by him that when the defendant and his. brother should come to, Macon and commence business, that he would put in §5,000, as a partner, to which the defendant as sented. There was no partnership and there was to be none until they come up to. Macon and com menced business. They never came and there never was any partner ship confirmed. It was error in the court to sustain the demurrer to plaintiff’s evi dence as disclosed by the record and grant ing the nonsuit. The question of part nership or no partnership should have been submitted to the Judge under the evidence of this case. . Judgment reversed, GEORGIA NEWS- eKEFFIN. The? JIakSe Georgian of the 5th cBabes the appended items: The revival of religion in the various churches of the city is progressing with good results. .Many of our sterling young men have become interested, and are joining the Church, The Methodist and Baptist Churches at Jackson have fseen blessed with most interesting revivals of religion. The Methodist meeting has, however, closed, but the Baptist continues, and many are joining by letter and experience." The Grand Jury of Monroe county last week, found a true bill vs.^ Moses A. Potts, Ordinary, for embezzlement of tlie county funds. He is, we learn from the Solicitor General pro iem: to*be tried this week. He was a deserter from- the South ern army in the late war. The alarm of fire was given last Friday night, between 9 and 10 o’clock, when it was discovered that a large stable owned by Mr. John H. George, w as burning.— The flames spread so rapidly that no one discovered the fire, although the stable is in a thickly settled portion of the city, until it was in a perfect blaze. Two val uable dray mules were in the house, which were burned to 'death. Quite an exciting scene occurred at the Baptist Church last Sunday night. The house was crowded to such un extent as to cause one of the sills to break. The nois startled a few members of the audi ence, and the terror spread so rapidly as to cause a perfect stampede. Some thought the house was on fire—others followed the crowd because it moved. There was quite a jam for a while,: and it is fortunate that no one received the slightest personal injury from any source. We have seen the various cotton ware housemen, of Griffin, and from their books we gather the following facts:- The warehouses of Griffin shipped the last cotton year, ending September 1st: Bales 23,359 Number of bales on hand 330 T E L EGR St. Paul, September u a storm passed over the town' ofV* yesterday, and a number of prostrated A man was fallv mg blown from the cars. J Kat/f TlAirca ' * - ^alt^Lake, September 5.__ A ^ Elder was arrested for conc'ealit?. fusing to deliver up a convidfc&i i to fifteen years imprisonment ' a N The mining transactions amounted to three-fourthsof 1 £39 TV* DTtV QT»A . There are reports SFSsh com all points. 1 di *x>T« from all points. The Episcopal Church was to-day, C J , Charleston-,. September 5.—XV of Health reports no yellow' fV,, Lexington, September 5. •The meeting commenced on Monday , al noted horses are already ' . sport promises to-be unusually J I The highest official majority J derson, Superintendent of struction—41,270. UJ;C Michael Gormley, vs. J. H. Taylor, Dis trict Attorney. Mandamus. District Courts. Vacancies. Governor’s au thority'to fill vacancies. Constitutional law. McKAY, J. When the Constitution creates an office to be filled by the appointment of the Governor, by the advice and consent of the Senate, but legislation is necessary to carry the Constitutional provision into effect, and an act for this purpose is passed which, by its expressed terms, does not take effect until the day after the adjournment of the Senate, the office is vacant and may be filled by the appointment of the Governor, until filled as provided by the Constitution.— It is immaterial whether the office has become vacant, or is vacant by having never been filled. In the latter case he may fill it under Section 66 of the Code, which authorizes him to appoint all offi cers and fill all vacancies, unless other wise prescribed by the Constitution and laws. It is the duty of Courts, in passing up on the constitutionality of laws, not to pronounce against them, except in a clear case, and to make every intendment possible in favor of the constitutionality. Art. 3, Sec. 1 and par. 3 of the Consti tution prescribes that “ the first meeting of the General Assembly shall be within ninety days after the adjournment of this Convention, after which, it shall meet annually on the second Wednesday in January, or on snch other day as the General Assembly may direct;” and that “no session of the General Assembly af ter the second, under this Consti tution, shall continue longer than forty days, unless prolonged by a vote of two- thirds of each branch thereof. ” The sea sion of 1870 may, in a very just and pro per sense, be the first or the second ses sion, as provided for and specifically re quired by this Constitution, so as to ex clude from the two sessions, called and extra sessions. The session of the General Assembly which poet on the 4th of July, 1868, more than ninety days after the adjournment of the Convention, under the order of Gen. Meade, though a legal session, was a called, or extra, or irregular session, and not one of the sessions contemplated by the Constitution. - The session of the General Assembly of 1870, it may be affirmed, was not a session after the second session, under the Constitution. The act of October 27, 1870, to assess a tax to pay the salary of the District Jndge and Attorneys is sufficiently defi nite, since from the census of 1870, the amount due from each county can be ap portioned, and the tax books in the Comptroller General’s office will point out the property to be taxed. Lochrane, C. J., concurred. Warner, J., dissented. Total. 23,689 The above, however, is not a fair esti mate of the amount shipped from Grif fin, as many of our planters did not store their cotton at'all, but shipped direct to Factors in Savannah. The following twinklings are from the Star of yesterday: Col. L. T. Doyal is well again. Trade is beginning to look up, and in a few weeks our merchants anticipate a lively time. We understand that there are quite a number of Swedes employed in Jasper county as laborers. % Mr. W. H-. Dews killed a regular Sea Gull at Osborn’s mill, about a mile from Griffin, which measured two feet from tip to tip. MACON. The Telegraph of yesterday has the fol lowing report of the remarkable result of a trial of the Snead bigamy case in Mil- ledgeville: The ease of the State vs. John T. Snead, charged with Bigamy, was called up on. Friday morning. It was proven by Cowles that, in tho city of New York, in May, 1868, the defendant introduced to several gentlemen a lady as his wife; and that she habitually called at his office after the business of the day was over, and was escorted by him out of the office and through the. streets of the city. It was further proven that, in January, 1869, the defendant addressed a letter from Boston to “Mrs. John T. Snead, Brook lyn, N. Y.,” signing the same as “Your affectionate Hubby. ” It was also proven that the letter was in the hand-writing of the defendant, and was received by ano ther witness in New York during the past summer from Mrs. Snead, who was in court, and identified as the lady whom the defendant had introduced as his wife, and also the lady from whom the letter in question was received. Mr. Cowles further testified that, in November last, in the city of Macon, he met with the defendant whom he had nob seen for several months, and inquired of ’ ’ “how and where is.Mrs. Snead now?” him Johns Hopkins, a Maryland Quaker, began life in Baltimore as\a small grocer, by industry, has brought himself to be the richest man in the South of Mason and Dixon’s line. He is now the largest stock holder in the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, worth §8,000,000, much of which he has given to endow Johns Hop kins University, on the outskirts of Bal timore city. Mr. Hopkins is a plain aged gentleman, still diligent and folly in business, and was one of the proprie tors and endowers of the line of iron steamships between Baltimore and Bre men.—Petersburg index. Snead replied “she is very well, and is still in New York. I will see her in a few days, for I leave to-morrow.” During the month of April last, and soon after the marrage of Snead to the lady in Mil, ledegville, the defendant met the witness, Cowles, upon the streets in Macon. In the course of their interview Snead said : “Charlie I have the nicest young wife iu Georgia.” They soon parted, and the witness testified that the announcement astonished him. Upon meeting him a few days afterwards, Mr. Cowley asked him what he meant about having a young wife ? The defendant answered • that he recently married a young lady in Georgia. Cowles replied, “what has become of the wife you introduced me to in New York ; is’ehe dead ?” Snead, much agitated, replied; “We don’t do things in New York like you do in Geor gia.” An exemplification from the rec ords of Bedford county, Va,, -was next introduced. It appeared that in May, 1861, application was made to the proper authority for license for the marriage of John T. Snead to Mrs. Annie H. Rob bins—the names of the parents of the respective parties, their residence, condi tion, etc., being stated. With this evi dence the State closed., Tlie defendant introduced no testimony, The charge of the court was unexcep tionable to the gentleman representing the State. About one o’clock, p. m., Saturday, the jury retired, and in a few minutes brought in a verdict of “JTot Guilty.” The result startled the whole community, as well as the court and the counsel for the prosecution. The excuse given for the finding was, that there was a doubt as to whether the lady introduced by Snead, as above stated, into society in New York, was the same lady whom he married in 1861, in Bedford, Virginia. Tbe Citizen has the following : We learn from parties just from Wil kinson county, tbat a diabolical murder was committed at Toomsboro, on Wednesday night, August 30th. Our informant states that a party of un- Memphis, September 5 —-Th P reports since Friday are vervJL® 01 Shedding from drought ooSfa low lands, especially”Tm-iSSf 1 Chicago, September 5 ; , 1 There i s a i rious drought in Southern BBiiok Brussels, September;. number of workmen have struck 1 W and a reduction iu t!ie soaberl Dublin, September 5.—There fierce fighting all night. Tl* JJ were driven to their barracks,, butr-l ed reinforcements and charged; the or! desperately. They were driven ki barracks again. ‘ ' 1 The rally wa3 repeated several times.ll with the same result. A bar of iron? thrown from a public house at the-poli which led to the storming of the ht and the-capturing of the inmates, attempt wus made to rescue tberxu bvl THOU, T*n Ilia lviffla « »l In the battle which followed house was completely wrecked by 1 mob in its frantic rage. The pri^J sang national songs all night, There! great excitement and it is increasing London, September 5.—Dr. Karfj a leading spirit of the International ciety, is dead. The Confederate Cotton Bondlioldl are about publishing a report and co: pondence: A special from Dublin says a of the riots is apprehended. The poL have been, ordered to use their revolv] unmercifully. The soldiers are still der arms for emergencies. The Sheffield strike has been setill by arbitration. A similar settlement the Newcastle strikers expected. Washington, September 5.—1 North Carolina Cherokee Indians will) removed in. a few weeks to Indian Te tory. ... H The National Executive Resident C: j mittee held a meeting here to-day, which the- following statement was thorized r This committee have had their att tion called, to an anonymous pm entitled “Concession, or How the 'Cause may be regained and tlie indeper ence of the South secured,” now l circulated over the States as though, nating from a Democratic source, committee feel authorized to denoi the same as a fraud, and the senti therein expressed as antagonistic to I principles and purposes of theDemoed party. Further, this committee are| the unanimous opinion that the sir originated from a Radical source the intention to deceive the peopk prejudice them against the only ( which can reform the administration the government and bring about a to honesty and Constitutional law. Sij Samuel J. Randall, .-b airman of the < mittee. Messrs. Randall, Slocum, Si Eldridge and Jeffries were persoi present, and Messrs. Niblack, Yoi Merrick and Smith were represented. Versailles, September 5TheP sian Cross Gazette says it was decided! Gastein to leave the Roman question tirely to Italy. Paris, September 5.—There are thousand in the city, and constant pet is kept up. Government has beeai formed of an intended demonstration! the Internationals on the 4th inst., orders for its repression are absolute: severe. Lyons, Marseilles, and Bonk aae filled with troops. Rome, September 5.—The annivei of the occupation by the Italian *“ under Gen. Cordoua, on the 2Sth tembeiywill be celebrated this year! passage of the National Guards thro the streets, theatrical entertainments,! A resident of Michigan, who was cused of chaining an apprentice boy,; titles himself on the ground that the would eat everything edible he could his hands on, whether cooked or and that he thought nothing of dei ing at one time two or three pounce | raw beef or pork. L. Maria Child, in writing upon tb hh T tlin A .a >rl M ras phi! it T LSI ron ;no pel M ;oui »en ras ras l) joyst T fowl t: let is ui lar land Sister ltwei [vers absurdities of female fashion, says: Seveu or eight pears ago bonnets w< hung on the back of the head a slipped down on the shoulders, in* of being perched on the forehead 0 tipping over the nose, as they .now At that time a bride in the vicimv, Boston left her father’s house soon the marriage ceremony, and ’rode or eight miles in a winter evening, dwelling of her husband. She bee*® silent during the latter part of the that the bridegroom was _ alarmed, there being no house iu sight, be ® as rapidly as possible, Arrived •' own door he lifted a corpse fr® 1 sleigh. Her bridal bonnet had no protection from the severe cold her brain was frozen. T [the T | up i E [ fecti | best T | g. : cliol | asn j havi t absc U Sod ton Mr. The inT & C M non venl fill1 the bav( acce sum hav< Colorado is the home of the br» 1 woman of the age, a Mrs. Van B-'J- One day in July, while her husban . several other men were in pursuit dians, her two little children cam® b ninginto the house, crying, ‘ J dians, the Indians !” Two sko.s m ^ Qians, tne xnaians i jliyu , the children struck the thick oa just as tho young mother shut n faces of three Cheyenne warriors, bolting the door and piling l )et *> t ; and stove before it, the mother se little ones into the cellar. Taking u uisttvvstj mtiiu I* O-X UU" l -LXlPit/ UUCO lli IU l Lit/ 1/C4UW.* i known persons., at the hour of midnight, volver and an old rusty rifle, tlw. . AD Hia /I n tt n Kattq mQnflaDn/l J mi Ell on the day above mentioned gagged and killed Matthew Deason, Sheriff- of Wil kinson county, aud also a negro woman in his employ, aud threw their bodies into a mill pond near by. The bodies were recovered on Friday morning and Sheriff Deason was found to have a gun shot wound iu the head, while the re- j The smoke attracted the attention ^ ^ mains of the woman gave evidence of ! scouting party, who returned w having been badly mutilated with a knife. ' prevent much damage from t* 10 woman stood near the open shooting only when a painted | uCL ,. itself visible in the brush. V a mined conduct kept the Indians spectful distance, and after two ^ vain maneuvering to outwit tu j, woman they set tire to the barn i ^ T iteu H poir Brq ger, cial in also and poii T the nun T iten r the. in t was kilb F Col the lear for pros toa< loat to n