The New York Herald Newspaper, November 24, 1876, Page 11

THE MARTINEZ-DEL VALLE SUIT Miss Martinez Again in the Witness Box, Fiat Contradiction of the Charges Made Against Hi Summing Up the Case by Counsel for the Defence, A Review of the Career of the Plaintiff. ‘The court room in which the trial of the Martines- Del Valle sult is being bold was crowded yesterday as usual. Owing to the excellent arrangements made by ‘the officers of the court, under the charge of Mr, Will- jam H. Ricketts, after all the seats had been occupied RO person was allowed in the room, and the result was that there was no disorder or confusion by persons standing in the open spaces between the boxes, Even those who sought for admittance before the hour fixed for the opening of the proceodings had arrived had to tango themselves along the wall of the corridor in single file, This plan prevented a crush at the door- ‘Ways, aud persons whose duties required them to be Present at tho trial had no difficulty in getting into the court room. Tho business of the day was begun by Mr, Beach Calling two witnesses (the evidence sought for boing im rebuttal), Thomas J. Hall, a musio dealer, with whom the plaintiff used to deal, and Patrick U’Brien, an employé of the Everott House, who had discharged the boy Manning. The questions put to them wero bjected to by the counsel for the defence, and the objections wero sustained by the Court, on the ground that the evidence they were expected to elicit was not 1m rebuttal of any testimony the defence had given. The two bell boys, Manning and Glennon, wore then culled. THR TWO BELL BOYS AGAIN. Manning testifed that be had stated thathe was om- ployed at the Everott House, and was discharged by Mr. O’Brien because he didnot suit; the night he was at Mr. Det Vatic’s he slept at homo; he loft Mr. Dob Valle’s belore ten o'clock; didn’t koow whether he made an aflidavit or not then; signed a paper and was sworn; went to the house of Mr. Buckley that night, but could not say whether ho hada conversation while there th one John Clune, To Mr, Choate—The affidavits were made out by Mr. Kel Valle’s lawyers after Thad made my statement and T chen signed it as did Glennon his statement. William Glennon testified that he went to Buckley's the night ho called at Mr, Del Valle’s; slept there that wight, having reached there about half-part ten; didu t know John Clune, but understood that he stops at Buckloy’a; saw bim about three weeks ago, Dut did not think he saw him the night he came trom Mr. Dol Val remembered that he had a conversa- tion with Mr. Buckley after he camo from Fourteenth street; nevor said to him that he would make enough ut of the case to keop him through the winter, nor did he say that he could make nothing out of tho Plaintiff because she was poor; simply told Buck- Wey that he had soon Mr. Del Vallo’s lawyors, To Mr. Choate—No one but Mr. Buckley was present when they talked about the case; when he told him that he was interested in the case he meant that ho knew something about it, having beon in the hotel where the plaintiff once stopped. ‘MISS MARTINEZ IN 4 DENYING OOD. ‘Tho plaintif next took the stand. Her counsel puta series of questions to her, with a viow of baving her Febut some of the evidence of the defence which was particularily damaging to ber. She wa seli-com- as ever, in no way flurried and o anawers quicely avd at times rather sbarply, confining hersclt principally to the monosyllabic “never,” which she occasionally pronounced twice to the same question in arather emphatic tone. Quite a number of questions td to her were objected to by the counsel tor he defence, on the ground that they were not rebutting any testimony already given by the de- Tence, and the objections were sustained by the Court. She denied that she met the defendant opposite Stew- art’s by appointment or that théy exchanged catds the day she teil in twenty-ninth migol peut she told bim that her fatber had been on: he saw her coming home from church with two young mop, or that on that day ber father took serious liberties with adding rather snappishly in making this denial, went tochurch;” sho denied that mnt her $60 in answer to a letter sent to he advised her to return home when si Hotel Royal; thut be ever expressed his disapproval of her leaving her home, or that he first offered her $80 a month ag housekeeper and finally ngreed to give her $100 a month; that be told her on the 24h of Jane that sho could no longer remain In his house on account of her conduct; that she ed to be allowed to remain and that she woul! thereafter be good, or that he ever told her that he had discovered an “irregularity” in the union of her father and mother; she also priori de- lured as false the testimony of the colored woman, Atnelia Jackyon, as to the roilmg on the floor with ber limbs exposed, und deniod sho ever slept with her bedroom door open, and 8 u Celia, when she rams from saratoga, only gave her $300, not $500; «ho iestibed that she did not ask Mr, Del Vaile at the jew- siry store to buy her a $300 pair of earrings, as there was. noi a $300 pair of carcings 1 the store.” Questioned avout the séene described by Mr. Del Valle when be alleges bo uiscovered her writing a letter which sho tried to hide from bim the day he says he spoke to her about tho irregularities” of her father and mother’s anion, she said no such vccurrence ever took place, and she denied that she ever exposed her limbs im- moucstly. ‘Tho following questions were yD put to her by Mr. Boach, the answers to which were given with a snap and emphasis which showed that the wit- nevs had made tp ber mind not 10 be misunderstood »nany polnt:— —* WHO ARE THE TRUTM TRULERS? bs bg hg gtho testimony of Wiliam Glennon’ did, sir, A ‘ Q In narrative as to his having taken up a par- cel to your room and nding the door locked and sev- ing a gentiewan by the pame of Froderi mond in the room, was thattrucf A. No, Whose name was appended to t hotel? A. There wore soversl names, ‘Q. Some of them had Hammond’s oameon? A. Yes, wir, Frederick A. Hammond. Q. Do you know where he is? A. I do not, Q Have you made efforts to fod bim? A. I have. Q (showing a diagrain) Is this a diugram of the room you occupied at the hotel Royal? A. Yes, sir, at is. * Q Does it represent the position of the furniture in asthe room? A. Yes, sir. Q You have also beard the testimony given by the man Manning? Th sir. Q He says that went to your room, knocked rt the door, inquired for Mr. Hammond, and that you opened that Hammond was sitting on tho bed, and ‘bat either you or Hammond said he would appear = any 8 occurrence tuke place? A. It is eareiy ir. Thi ‘witness then testified that on o1 it ie now he vilis at that ir. to anybody except call, that she that time wat the boy Manni and spoke a few words to Mr, Hammond; my door was not lucked, [he witness was here phed with ques- tous relative to the testimony of Celia Rambow and Mrs. Quackenbos, so far as it aifveted her. She denied li the accusations made against her by Celia, and deciared that she never Lad the conversation with Mrs, Qauckenbos that that lay bad Lestitied to, and emphatically asserted that Cellu’s story about being in her room several hours on the first Sugday in June, 1875, wag absolutely false. The remainder of her testimony was as follows: The door leading into the ball from the room Jackson occupied was obstructed by heard Mrs. Quackenbos’ testimony; never remember buving any tuch conversation with her as sho described; never wot her belore she came to Poughkeepsie; beard ar. Lewis’ testimony m regent = to the wanvactions ut Mrs, Nelson's; bever requested © letters leit there; never stuted to Lewis or ybody that two letiers wining money bad jost; never saw Lewis before be received from bim jetters wit , gover was ut Lows’ office, 305 Browiway; the stato- mout of Mr, Del Vallo that 1 tntroduced him to Mr. Uramer is false; did not Know bim then (January, 1874); became vcquainted with him im the latter part of February, 1876; was introduced to bim by ts srother ; detendant’s two eldest vaughidrs spoke Hog. dels very well; dul vot give Dol Vase my picture the fay altcr the accident; uid not yo to Central Park with aitw, a8 bo Lestified to; we had a conversation about my leaving my wotber’s boiore I.did 60; he never toid me that he imiended to pay toe $150 for my nerviecs to aim betore l went to Poughkeepsie; the statement he atthe Hotel Roya and gave ; he gave me no movey when he came there first: cqialiy lise i tho statement that he re- monstrated With me about my conduct at Pougikeep- sic, und that T replied that it seemed impossible he could be alraid of sleeping with i. a Rainbow's atement that 1 seut her to Mr. Del Vallo to get money pay my fare ome is not true. ‘Lo Mr. Chouie—1 made this pian (pian shown) of the room I occupied ut the Hotel Koyal. Q@ According to [sop the bed must have been two and a halt feet long by six inches wide if the room jour feet wide? A. T am not om archivect, The witness then continava--Did not know Louis Cramor in Janaary, 1875; ho js tho sane gomtleman who maue me 4 proposal of mati iago, is FL NEW YOKK HERALD FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1876.—TRIPLE SHEET. Hero the counrel read from her dircet testim in which she had stated had known Louis Cramei quite a while’? belore ni proposed tober, which was during the first week of February, SUMMING CF FOR THE DRFENC! At five minates of twelve Mr. Choate ratulating the jury that the caso had fe did pot know how experienced the jury were in seduction cases. As bimselt it was the frst time that be ventured in that region of the law and bis ticipation in the trial had been a painful duty for Bim. He certain that the jury woald bo only too glad when they would be relieved from the noxious atmosphere of the case. He desired to put them on ‘bor guard against any false sympathy tor the fair plaintiff. Somethings Do man was proo! against— pity, com, , human feeling jor a ‘woman the = plaintif. He ogo ul himself from the bottom of his beart. ald, far ag duty to his chent would permit, shield her trom the torrent of evidenco against ber that sbe bad di forth by her in wl been a providential arrangement, elderly metubers of the jury wero seated bearer to the plaintiff—exposed to the full blaze of her charmsat short range. Laughter.) It had been said to him by several persous that be had a clear case, one thing that would ing a verdict—there was ioe would merits, He recalled tho testimony of the plaintiff that she cid not want money—only desired that ber charac- ter should be established. Ho asked, had it not been established’ Tho press bad published to the world every morning the details of the trial, and ‘be asked if the plaintiff, by coming into court, had not ostablished her character by her written evidence aud her oral evidence, established it in a way that would never be forgotten It was ber mistortuve from nine years vl age to twenty to have been under the rigid discipline of a mano whom she had described as @ brute, und who, to bia wind, was one of the most startling monsters cver exhibited ina court. It had been proven that whilo ber family wero without meavs, that they were also without religion, without Church and without a God. When she met the detondant the plaintiff! was already an adept in the ways of New York lite—already pos- sessing an alias She foll in with this rich Cuban, and the whole evidence showed that never did a privateer on the Spunish Main board a pomoward bound Indian ship so determinedly than did this family board this rich Cuban and determine to capture him. Ho was a big bonanga, and they resolved to seize him. Tho counsel then spoke of ner going to Solari’s, ivto pri- vate rooms willingly, and going to # hotel under an assumed name, The excuse she made, that it was only for “a fow days,”? reminded him of tho wet nurso who bad a child and coulda’s prove ahe bad a husband, and who excused hersel! to hor employer by sayiog that anyhow the child was ‘only a vory smatl oue.’’ (Laught When sho was ‘‘seduced,”’ as she claimed, the plaintiff, imstead of making an outcry which would bave brought her assistance, had, by her own testimony, shown that 6h had surrendered her person witr ali th ot a person experiepced in criminal conversation, Mr. del Valle denied he had ever bad criminal intercourse with her, and to the counsel behind him. Hoe ro:erred to the fact that the plaintiff had er blushed during the entire trial or given a sign of distress. Nota re- rier prosent had been abie during the trial, in is allusions to ber to say that she looked dis- tressed. When she once put her handkerchiel to her face while testifying her counsel raised a cry of “Water! water!” as though the beach was about to be wrapped in flames; and then it turned out to be only a momentary ccl ot the handkerchiel, and ‘that she had been SHEDDING DRY TEARS. Aftor that with radiant face and sparkling eye and tripping tongue she went on with her testimony to tha enu of tho case, He called attention to the exhibition sbe bad mado of herself on the stand—to the zest and | relish and keen enjoyment with which she went into all the stories of smut and indeceuey purporting to | the defendant Le tuen said tho do about his adventure have been told her by showed that tho story fendant told = her with a Spanish lady, who bad po children, could. be found in the Decameron; that 1 bad got ioto French iiterature, when doubtless the plaintil bad picked it up under the tuition of her monster of a stoptather. He next attacked her veracity, and asked what could be thought o! her oath in flat denial of the oaths of Mr. and Mrs, Quackenbos and tweivo other wit- pnessos; of her statement, cohtradicted by her letter, that her stepiather was always ‘“ender anu gentle.” He then went into the question of the promise of mar- riage and argued that lithe jury were satisted there bad been no such promise, the subsequent relations of the two parties were of Do uccount and the verdict should be jor the deiendant, Among oiher things, to fortily his argument that there was no promise of m riage, bo quoted tho plaintill’s testimony where she ‘anid marringe was never apoken of between her and the defendant until three weeks after thoi first uc- quaintance, and yet swore that the ring boagnt by the defendant was the engagement ring in the luce of the proof given by the jeweler thatthe ring was bought the very day afier they had first met, the 15th of January. He next referred to the plaintit’s going underthe name of Howard, ber Genial of the fact, while her own leiters proved that she did go under that name, and that long betore she know Mr. Del Vaile 8 in the habit of receiving letters under that name, Ho asked the jury, as sensible men, what (bey would think if they heard their sister or wile went by an alias and uoder that alias kept up a corre- spondence with men? What amount of sold gold would they take to let such a thing go on if once they found it out? He next wok up the letter of the loth of March, calle@ibe letter of confession, m which the plainuff revealed her stepfather’s villany, showing that the contents of the leiter were directly agaimst ber ovidence giving him a good character. Ho contended that thero was no evidence to sow that sbo bau roturred the ring, and that her rtatement that sho bad written a leiter to Del Valle conta ning it was He referred to tho defendant, contenuiny tbat bis testimony had vee straightiorward. There were only two ulscrepanc! in tt. and be examined it narrowly; he fad said, on bw direct examipauon, that he bad written the marginal notes on the secret letter the day after 1s Teceipt, aud on cross-examinution stated he coula not tell when ho nad written the notes, This, Mr. Choate contended, Was not ub argument against the deleud- ant; be had been obviously careful to dbserve his vath, The discrepancies were the simpie icsult of over care on his part to be right. He believed that no mad connected with the case would ever go tothe help of a woman hercalter, who slipped up in the sireet, on the ice, or on un orange peel, ( Tho example of the good Samaritan di this case, us it was a man then helping fulling ip W by # woman wae an historical trick of the ot the pave.” The trick haa ofun begun manyan acquaintance that had ended uigustrously. Speaking of the meetings at So- lari’s the counsel said thal it was not a place where a man, uiter being Letrothed to a woman, took her to carry on ils courtsbips, He ridiculed the idea vf the alleged cogagement between the piaintil she and delendunt, wad the story tbat hor steptather wou!d shoot any she would marry, 1 tepfather, on learning from Mr. Cevallos that the detendant was forgot his shooting intentivns, it he over had any, and assented having him caught im the meshes. If sme had ever been engaged to Vel Vaile tuy fact would not only bave leaked vut among some of her neighbors, but the family would have proclaimed it from F.ity-sixth street to Second ave. nue. Del Valle had nibbieg, but hud not taken hold of the bait, Had the two been engaged, bow could the visits of Louis Cramer and his proposul of marria; three weeks alter the alleged engagement be looked upon? Any man whose daughter would be thus yierved alter veg engaged would conclude o ad too many beaus to ber sting of too many wirings to her beau. (Laughter.) How could the plamtiff have time to attend tu Cramer if most of ber tme was taken op with the doiondant in going to Soiari’s and with ber “digressions?’ (Loud Jaughter ) Ho usked what would be thought of we piatutif and her mother and sister it the confessiou letter was not true? If true, how was it that this step-father, whose beastiiness was exposed in that letier, went to see ber at Poughkeepsie with ber mother ata time and piace ever belpless against bis at- tacks? Agam, Was it such @ letter that a woman 0 had given her He argued to show that the plaintiff! went to the Hotel Royul because Frederick Hammond was there, the autuor of the letters, the envelopes of which in 1874, addressed to ‘Miss Howard," bore the initials “py, H.” Where was Hammond during ali the time? At the Palisades Hotel, in New Jersey. trom which we doubt it the jar pluintif’s finger would not bave drawn bim to the court as the magnet draws tho needle, but from which a subpucna could not bring him. Tae counsel showed that the testimony of u two bell boys bud remained uuinpeached, altiough a jou wi early pul up on them, Mr. Clune being the instrument in the bands of the other side to do it with, but Mr, Clave did not dare to come up to the scratch when called. He asked if tt was reasonable 10 suppose that a girl engaged to a man would, astne plaintil nud done, cuter his service as a meuial and receive puy for her services. Mr, Chvato then argued against the cuurge of seduction, which, ho sald, was only a se ‘ondary consideration, us the aceusa- Sedvetion winder promise Of marriage; if there Was no stich promise tue seduction was ot ‘vo account, If Del Valle had imtended wo do as she charged, the tue aud the place were when they wei wioue at Solari’s, when they were under the fluence of wine, and when, in this great city, they could havo xoue where tuey pleased, Yet, sho guys, it occurred at his house, Where there were ture women servauts, three men servants, two children and two gentiomen, She made wo outcry. She did not get up wheu he came in, And When she Uubuckloed ner belt it seerhs, according to her, she wont all to pieces. (Lauguter.) To his mind, she would not have gone to pieces unless there was a loose woman belind the belt, He showed that a woman im tho condition she clumed was ecvuid not buve indulged iv the horseback rides and the rompa und in the ‘neadomic postures’ chastely described by Del Valle, or in the “rolling on theie stomachs’? ip the ineadow, which she, in the com- pany of her sister Adele, to enjoy. according to their own witness, Frolig ie contended that it was absurd to suppose thate she was seduced three times. (laughter), and that If @ man bad done three times whut she says Del Vaile had done he would have continuod mis cor duet it be and his copartner were together for weeks at a time and opportunities were abundant, Choate closed alver dissecting the letters and tes- ony of tie pluintif! op Other points in the case, anu declared to the jury that he felt io bis heart that they could not, according to the testimony, onder their vaths, but give the verdict to the deteadent, Hy domg so they woult make @ declaration to every woman In the commuaony of whieh the plautiit had shown hersoil to be, that she cOuld not make use of Ube Jaw to further her nefarious schemes of blackmail against any man. It was afronged before the samming up began that counsel un cach side should be confined to two hours. and «hall, Mr. Beact will begin bis summing up al ten o'clock this moroing. The Jadge will probably doliver his charge after the allernoon recess, and we ( Jury Will have the cuse Lorre three o’civck, THE COURTS. The Effort to Consolidate the Rival Harlem Steamboat Companies. Application to Enjoin the Contem- plated Consolidation. Continuation of the Argument in the Booth’s Theatre Case. Using Kerosene a Vitiation of a Fire lasurance Contract. Some twenty-five years ago a company calling itself tho Harlem and New York Navigation Company estab- lished a ind of steamboats between Harlem and Peck shp, making, however, two or three intermediate landings. About two years ago a rival Hoe was eatab- lished calling itself the Morrisania Steamboat Com- Pany, Botweon these competing lines there has been great rivalry, but the Morrigania line, it is alleged, bas Deon unable to crowd off tho other line, as 1s stated to have been its original purpose, und instead has found its enterprise not altogether a paying one, Altogether Mt was dcomed desirablo to consolidate the two com- panies, and, as stated, arrangements were mado to this offect, wheo application was mado by William Watson, ove of the stockholders of the Harlem and New York Navigation Company, for an injunction to enjoin the consummation of the contemplated consolidation. A temporary in- janction was granted, with au order to show dause why, the same should not be made permanent, Upon this order there was an extended argument yesterday, betoro Judge Lawrence, in Supreme Court, Chambers, ex-Judge Cardozo appearing for Mr. Watson, Mr. Abderson appearing tor the old steamboat line and Mr, Harrington ior the opposition linc, Numerous afh- duvits of the directors ana other officers of the two compantes were read, and alter this there was a zen- eral presentation of the leading points of the coutro- versy on both sides, ex-Jadge Cardozo making tho opening argument, He contended that the proposed combination wus clearly illegal and contrary to ‘Ube statutes authorizing the charter tor the Harieia and New York Navigatton Company. This statute provided that the company shouid Lot combine with any other company for any purpose whatever, Read- ang from tho complaint, he endeavored to show that Ube Harlem and New York Navigation Company bad combination within the meaning of the statute, It Was argued on the other hand that the scheme bad been openly talked about and discussed by tho stock- holders and the directors tur some time previous; that the agreement was not a combination tu the til senso iu which the word is universaliy used; Was simply entered into for the convemience of the travelling pub- tha’ somo accident would result opposition carried on between the | opposing compani twas also stated that the pro- posed measure would be pecuniarily advantageous to the stockholders of both companies, aod would result to the public good, ; Alter a lengthy argument Judge Lawrence took the papers, reserving his decision, “BOOTH'S” THEATRE CASE. Argument in the suit brought by Mr. Edwin Booth against Messrs. Jarrett & Palmer to restrain them from the use of the name *Booth’s’ in counce- tion with the theatre known heretofore by that name, and of which the defendants are tho lessees, was cou- tinued and concluded betoro Judgo Van Brunt, in Com- mon Pleas, Chambers, yesterday. On behalf of the defendants, andin opposition to the moion for the temporary injunction asked for, Mr. Benjamin F. Ru: sell argued that Mr. Booth never had any exclusive right to the name “Booth;’? that even if he had such right, he had named the theatre in question “Booth’s”” Theatre, and had leased it as such to Junius B. Booth; that, with plaiotif’s assent, defendants had become the aasignecs of that lease, und such assignment carried with it the right to the use of the name under which the theatre was leased; that plaintif 1s not entitled to the reliet he aske, and that, even sbould it be finally discovered that the plaintill’s rights have been preju- diced by the use of the name, which defendants deny, they are abundantiy abie to respond in the amount of damages. Mr. Charles H. Tweed appeared to represout the ex- ecutors of the late Oakes Ames, whe owned the prop- erty, having purchased it under a forcclosure sale of a mortgage to Lim. He claimed that the owner of the proporty bad a right to have it known and described us ‘Booth’s’’ Theatre, aud that the grantdg of the temporary injunction’ now asked for vy Mr. Booth would be fatal to the rights of the property owners, The right to the use of this name Mr. Tweed placed on the ground that Mr. Booth lensed the property under that name, bud assigned bis iuterost in it und that name, a8 such had mortguged !t, and ag such it was purchased at the foreclosure sale. The name bad thus become part of the property aud was important to it und ity Value. Mr. Luke A. Lockwood was proceeding to reply on the part of Mr, Booth, when Judge Van Brunt called his attention to the fact that, tn his judgment, the im- portaut question in the case was, that plaintiff baving called the premises “Booth’s”” Theatre, und having leased and conveyed them as such, why should uot the parties representing these leases and conveyances bave the right tu continue the use of the name. On this point Mr. Lockwood argued that tl was a dif- ference between tho use of the pames “Booth” and Booth’s.” The latier, by which the theatro in ques- tion was called, was possessive, ued indicated ’a posser- sory right on the part of Mr. Booth, That possession and ail bis connection with the theatre nad loug sinco coused, and it could no longer be properly said that it was Booth'’s Ibeatre, Even if dr. Booth had given Junius B. Booth permission to use the name, ho bad a Tight to withdraw that permission at any time. Judge Van Brant said he wished to have the lease to Javius B. Booth handed to bim, and, taking the papers, reserved his decision, A MODISTE’S INSURANCE. Mrs. Bonzgrand keeps a modiste’s store at 1,233 Broadway. In October, 1874, she insured the goods in her store, consisting of ladies’ bats, costly laces, raro Jeathers and choice articles for ladics’ adoroment as comprised within the necessary outfit of a modiste’s store, with the Ztua Fire Insurance Company to the amount of $2,090, Ou the morning of January 29, 1875, madame rose eariy and repaired from the upper part of the premises, which she occupied as ber home, to the store below to make some arrangemonts of ber goods for the coming day’s business, She lighted her- selt at ber work in the eurly morning with a small kerosene lamp. By a mischance « spark was, in somo munwer unexplained, c:itted from the flame of the Jamp and set Ure to a quantity of lace, somo ostrich feathers, two sample Frencly bats and other Freuch = 2 i] = = 5 & % $ < illinery goods, These were eutiroly destroyed to the value ot $685 The same day sho reported the accident to the Aina Fire Insurance Company, und served upon them Jater a proof of loss, itemizing a8 far as pussiblo the arfictes destroyed, their cost value, invoices of sale, tue parties from whom she purchased them, and other jaformation as required by the agreement in the policy. The company did Lot accept this, and contended that madame failed to give the required proof in every barticuar as demanded by the policy, and declined to reiuburse her for her joss, She thereupon brought suit in the Marine Court to recover, The sotion was resisted On the ground that the use of kerosene oil as © light in the sture of on any part of the premise oecupied by her was in violation of the policy agree- ment. General Davies, defendant’s couusel, moved to dismiss the cause on the ground of vitiaton Of the con- tract through the ase of kerosene and the consequent destruction of the property im question thereby. Judge Alker held the point well taken, and directed the jury to find a verdict for tho company. SUMMARY ‘OF LAW CASES. The caso of Marte Algic, to recover from Hon. Fer- nando Wood $5,500, which has becn on trial in tho Superior Court, beiore Judge Curtis, and already no- ticed in the Henan, was given to the jury yesterday evening and a sealed verdict orderod, The suit of Jonn Adolph, to recover damagés froin the Central Park, North and Rast River Railroad Com- pany for injuries received In consequence of a car of defendant colliding with a wagon which he was driving on avenue A, is being tried for the second ti in the Superior Court, before Jadye Sedgwick and a jury. Un the first trial the piaintil’s complaint was dismissed, but the Commission of Appeals reversed that decision aod awarded plaiutiff a new trial, i To the suit of Moritz Pain and Leopold Pain against Fredevick Villmer there wasa motion made betore Judge Larremore, in Supreme Court, Chambers, yes: terday, 10 Vacate an exevation against the body of fondant under a Jadgment obtaiued in a suit 10 equity lor the wrongtul detention of certain property. The Court took the papors, reserving cevision, Ju the suitot George Young against. Martin Gua ming, b ted iu the Marine Court and repforied in yes- terauy’s Hrnato, a verdyet was rendered by the jury Yesterday in favor of the defendant. The contest was i relation to the sion of $500, which Young hud we Bauk, and which be part of a lar; ey of whicd be bad been robbed by a wor nawed Eteanor Young, now in State Prison, and.wih whom Goorge Young ia aileged to Lave been in some way connceted. Iu the Cart States “Court yester the case of Jon G, Stevens against the New York and Oswego agreed with the opposing company to alter its time | 1 wabies and other urrangoments, tending to show x» | | Midland Railroad Company and bondholders, repre- i senting. $6,000,000 worth of stock, camo up belore Judge Blatchiurd. Plaintiff moves for leave to appeal | lo the United States Supreme Court, Judge Biaicn- Jord granted the mojlon. James W. Smith was yosterday brought before United States Commissioner Shields on a cnarge of tilegal vot- tngat the laie election. The complaint was brought by Benjamm B. Buckman, the father-in-law of the ac- cused, who alleges xs the motive inducing him to rosxecute that Smith lott ing unable to support duugbter, Smith not being entitled to vote, missioner released him on giving $250 bail to appear for examination ov tho charge. ‘The suit brought by the city against the Union Ferry Company, to set aside the ferry lease granted by the city to the company in 1871, came up for trial yester- day before Judge Van Vorst, in Supreme Court, Spe- cial Term. It is claimed that the city 1a a great loser by the loases and that the same are ifivalid. A prelim- mary objection was raised to introducing certain reso- dations of the Comunssioners of the Sinking Fund, on the ground that they were not specially plead Owing to the objection the caso went over until to- in the Court of Common Pioas ye: tachment issued tor contempt of court, beeause he re- fused to be examined regurding tho salary of one Richard Lee, av employé, who has been suca by Albert Day and saflered judgment. The hearing was adjourned until Monday, and Mr, Jones remains in nominal charge of the Sberitf, DECISIONS. SUPREME COURT—CHAMBERS, By Judgo Lawrence, Troup va. Novilie; Pelletreau vs. The Industrial Ex- hibition Company; Walter va. Phillips; Townsend vs. R00; U'Connor Vs, Hebrew Benevolent Orphan Asy- Jom Company; Walter vs. Puillips; Same va Same; Adams vs. Crosby; Atari Rehet Fund socie Poulips; Kiad va Fare; Smith ve. Cranoy; Importers und Traders’ Bank vs. Kotn and others (six orders); Moloughney, Jr., va K Hulett vs. Trucking; Duncan vs. Pollard; Rectors, Wardens and Vestrymen of St. John’s Uhurch} Perry vs. Baldwin Mabulacturing Company ; Howard vs. Lanning; Belloni va, Adams; Storrs vs. Boutl.—Orders granied. James vs, Borrowe,—Expianation required. Smuh vs. Philips; Same ve, Same.—Reiui Berkshire Woollen Company vs. Juilliard.—Memo- Fandum for couusel. Connolly vs. Daytou.—l think the sureties are suilicwent. Sage ys Grant,—I wish to hear counsel in regard to allowance in this case, 4n the matter of MeGill,—Where ts the order con- Orming reierce’s report? Kimball vs. Newton.—I require tho af™idayit referred to in this consent, and ulso the picadings. ‘Allen vs. Fox.—Mouon granved, and case placed on Special Circuit catendar tor Friday, December 8, 1876. Ridgewood Insurance Company va, Spears.—Where aro the other affidavits which are relerred to in tus order? Quind; long arrest, | _ dp the matter of the Southern and Auantic Telegraph | Company,—Counsel will oblige me by referring me to | some authority for this appheation. Importers aud Traders’ National Bunk vs. Kohn.—It | 18 quite possible to try there cases in au hour, aud the motion 1 therotore granted tor Friday, Decomber 8, va. Palmor.—This transaction took place so that 1am not inclined to issue an order of Rucker vs. w York, Housatonic aud Norihern Ratlroad Company.—I have examined the repori of the releree and the proposed judgment, bat 1 do not Bnd | the complaint, This I deaive to examine betore signing the judgment. Hayate va Roact.—Tbe action is brought to recover Apenally for neglect to fie tuc aunual report unuer the twellth section of 1848. 1b is not upon contract, Merchants’ Bauk vs, Bliss, 35.N, Y., 412. The penalty imposed by that sectiou 1s that upon failure to file such report the trustees of the company shall be jomuy and severally hablo sor all the debts of the company then existing, &e, ‘fhe character of the action 1s determined, by tho complunt, Webb vs. Darragh, N.Y., 570. An inspection of the complatut shows th: itis not upon contract, but ty brouzbe to eniorce a tial Obligation of the defendant auder the statute in 48 cupacity as trustee, Mviion for reference denied, with costs, Gurdner vs. Jones.—Tnere is nothing before me which shows the power of the Provate Court of the ety of Sun Francisco, nor the powers and duties ut tho guardian of Larkin, appointed by sald court The Mortgage which 13 sougut to have satt-fed appoars to have been executed on the 13th of June, lott. The guardian was appointed in San Francisco on the 2st of July, 1876, uw iew weeks alter the exceution of the mortgage, For what purpose the tnorigugo was made Tam not informed, nor ts the amount secured thereby ag the tine for which the mortgage Was to run sta! 1 desire 1urther aild.vite on those poiuts, and must be patisfiod of the jurisdiction of the Probate Court over | insane persons or persons of unsound imind before 1 Will grant the writ usked Lor, COMMON PLEAS— CHAMBERS. By Judge Van Brunt. Battershall and another vs, Salomon,—Motion do- nied, with $10 costs, SUPERIOR COURT—SPECIAL TERM By Chiet Justice Curtis, Gross ve. Knapp. —Order settied. Smith vs. Sinith,—Memorandum tor counsel, By Judge Speir. Fairfax va. The New York Central ana Hudson Rivor Railroad Company.—Order denying metion tor turthor security. ‘Cary Va Stevens et al.—Undertaking approved. smith vs, Cantrol,—Oracr to tie certain papers with clerk. Hodges et al. vs. Motzer.—Undertaking approved. Zschotski vs. Gunther,—Order appointing Joun Townshend, Esq, referce. Horton vs, Moore.—Reference ordered to Wilham Watson, Esq. Polvamus va. Meizs —Findings settled, Reed vs, Livingston, —Order dismissed. Matier of Hateh.—Order directing money to Chamberlain and appointing Trapbagen, Esq., to dorgr Mart vs. Scbrider. —F Gross ve. Koapp.—vruer denying motion for new payment of Vintiam C, trial. Tho Mutual Life Insurance Company va. Mcf.aughhio ot al.—Nos. 1 und 2—Report of reicreo conirmed and Judgment of fordelosure und sale ordered. In; ie! vs. the Tonth National Bank.—Findings settl Carnes vs. Platt; Lovison vs. Robbins ct al. ; Rooney, Jr., v4. The Third Avenue Railrona Company; Kilmar ye. Smith; The Hanover Nationa! Bank ve. Schumacher et al, und Cunningham va. Tae Second Aveuue Railroad Company.—Orders granted. MaRINE COURT— CHAMBERS, By Judge McAdam, Golazier va. Young.—Opinion. Kernochan vs, Wooster. —Viaintiff to serve reply. Hireh va. Howard; Aboro vs. Slade; he Mayor, &., ‘va, Smith; Hyams vs. Mayer.—Motion granted, Clarke v8 Graber; Fromper va. Wheeiock.—Motion granted condstionally, Konn vs. Spiegel. —Motion for commission granted. Rosenberg vs. Schwartz—Motion to vacute arrest denied, Rich vs. Courcey.—Complaint dismiased condition- ally. Warr va, Starko,—Motion’ to set aside denied and motion to amend granted. Winfeld vs Harris; Kernochan va. Wooster; Clo- herty vs. Eogers; Satfor va. Kuothal; Schattys, Henry: Uiman vs. Friedenrich; Wise vs. Hornitz; Lango va. Gillespie vs, Montgomery ; t vs Schook; Singer vs. National Register Company ; Motcalf vs. Penton; Silbrech Tho Ma: Nelson vs. The North Amerigan Life In- surance Company, —Urders granted. Kamena vs. ‘ograp.—Order discharging attach- | ment THE SULLIVAN-LYONS HOMICIDE. The trial of Daniel Sullivan, indicted for murder in the second degree for killing Patrick Lyous, was re- sumed yesterday bolore Judge Davis in the Court of | Oyer and Terminer, Aasistant District Attorney Lyons conducting the prosecation, and Mr. John O, Mott and ex-Judge Curtis appearing for the prisoner, The do- fence was justidable homicide. Un the 25th of Septem- der lust the prisoner was sbovelling in coke for Sr, Little, corner of Bayard and buxter streets, The ev- jdeuce for the prosecution showed that the deceased was hit on the head with a shovel by Sullivan, which fractured bis skull and caused bis death. Through a rigid cross-examination by Mr. Mou, tho tacts were developed that the deceased was drunk on the day ia question; that he was “spoiling for a fight”; that while in this humor he tatertered with the prisoner, who struck bim with his shovel 10 sett-detence, ‘The jury, after a brief absence, brought ina verdict of guily of manslaughter {n the fourth degree, and tho prisoner Wus thereupon sentenced to wo years in tue Sto Vrison, GENERAL SESSIONS—PART L Before Recorder Hackett, PLEAS AND SENTENCKS, ln this court yesterday Frederick Scnnadicke was arraigned, charged with burglary ta tho first degree, in having broken juto the house of David Cohen, No. 29 ~ Broadway, at four o'clock, oa the morning of November 18, With intent to steal, Mr, Cohen grap- pled the burglar and held him woul a pohceman came. ‘The prisoner pleaded gality, and was sent to Sing Sing for ten yours, TONY PASTOR'S JEWELS. James McGuire, ¢wenty-three years old, of No, 323 avenue A, charged with attacking Antonio Pastor, of No. 115 West Seventeenth street, at eleven o'clock on tho night of November 6, whilo he was walking up Broadway, aod tearing from his vest a gold chain and ‘a diamond sot locket valaed at $550, with which he ran away, pleaded guilty, and was remanded for sen- 4 tence. David Adriance was # three years and six mouths for stealing $30 Busse, of No, 29 South Filth avenue. Wiliam Barrett struck James McCormick, of No. $21 Greenwich street, aua seus to the Penitentiary jor oue your, Rudolph Witlegerod, charged with stealing a coat from Thomas 8, Hutl, of No, 207 Eighty avenue, pass. jug a faise check on Ciemens Weber, of No. 283 Blvceker street, and obtaining money ona forged order trom William H. Lawes, of No. 259 Eighth avenue, wos sent to Stato Prisow for four years, / COURT CALENDARS THIS DAY. Surasme Covat—Cnamners—Held by Judge Law- Fonce,—Nos. & 1, 74, 86, 92, 96, 10 104, 120, 121, jt to the State Prison for from Susaa 122, 123, 191. 146, 155, 166, 164, 165, 175, 202, 207, 212, 217, dav Bue, 240! B4Ot 28; 257? Sos, yBa, Bo, Surnvan Cover—sinciat Trka—Heid by Judgo Van Vorst,—Nos. 506, 620, 503, 96, 261, 350, 220, 420, 419, 425, 500, 447, 453, 454, 455, 430, 402, 407, 408, 472) 473, 805, 507, 609) 511, 612. Surneme Cocat—Cixceir—Part 1.—Adjourned tor the term. Part 2—Held by Jadge Barrett—Short causes. ‘3842, BS04, ‘2878, 3843, 3784, 150455. 3866,’ 331s, 12, 3580, 3640, S771, 1770, 3870, 3826. Part 3. not be called vefore two P. 8889, 3701, 2765, 3147, 3451, a S487, BOUL, SIS2, 2897, 3639, 3649, GST1, UB4T, GATO, 3800, 8636. 3801 Svregion Covat—Sreciat Trrm—Held by Judge Speir.—Nos. 36, 79, 7 Svrgwion Covat—lRia, Terx—l'are 1—Held by Judge Curtis—short ci Ni 709, 379, 489, 604, 24, 1058, 7 1008, B13, 391, 244, 1053, 318, Bel, 305, 623; B89, 271, 317, Vommox PLeas—Equity Tera—Held vy Judge Van Brunt,—-Nos. 9, 29, 30, 31, 83, 3: Common Fiwas—Prian Teru—Part 1—held by Judge Robitison —Short causes.—Nos, v6l, 107¢, 1113, 1116, 1045, 856. General Culendar, 203, S90, Dud, B06, 871,’ 665, 1125, 851, 848, Manixe Covnt—TriaL Tsru—Parts 1 and 2— Jouroed for tho term, Part 3—No day calendar, TF 4—Hold by Judge Goepp.—Noa. 5202, 18 5160, 6143, 6121, 6228, 5208, $242, 6278, 6128, 51. 5883, 5226, 6229, COURT OF APPEALS. Atuany, Nov, 23, 1876 Tn the Court of Appeals to-day the following cases were argued:— No. 16. Bache vs. Doscher.—Argued by Lewis San- ders for appellant, B, M. Stilwell jor respondent, No. 38. White vs, Hickman.—Argued vy N. C. Moak for appellant, Joba A. Godirey tor respoudeut. 'o, SL, Hauck va, Craighead.—Argucd by A. C. Fransiah for appellant, Goorgo V. N. Baldwin tor re- sponaent, No. 27, Wing va, Cornell,—Argued by William Peet for appellant, J. T. Silliman tor responden No. 24. Brugue vs, Lord.—submitted tor appellant, argued by 8, Jones for respondent, No. BL Steger vs. Colyer,—Argued by James H. Gilvert for appellant, N. H. Clement for respondent. Proclamation made and Court adjourned, CALENDAR, The following i3 the day calendar for Friday, No- vember 24, 1876:-—Nos. 46, 22, 20, 58, 69, 65, TH “LHE GARDENER'S PRETTY DAUGH- TER.” REFUSAL BY THE SUPREME COURT OF A NEW TRIAL—MR. BROWN TO PAY THE DAMAGES ORDERED BY THE LOWER couRT. Trexroy, N. J., Nov. 23, 1876. The Supreme Court to-day refused the new trial in the caso of “The Gurdener’s Pretty Daughter,” Alice Noice vs. Susan D. Brown, Mis. Brown 18 mother of Albert D, Brown, ag: it whoin Miss Noice had obtained verdict in Mercer county Gourt for $2,200, value of wardrobe which Brown bad forcibly taken from her while both were in England. The particulars of this case have been published s eral times in the Huzany and is knowa as a transcon- tipental scandal, Brown, it is alleged, soduced Miss Noice while on an extended tour in South Amer ca aud England, itis al- teged, under promise of marriage, then deserted her in the Jutter place, leaving her with burdly enough clothing to wear, She tustituted several suits, aod in ove obtained a verdict as stated, Brown said he haa no property to sanly the judgment, bat it was proved in court, to the.satistuction of the jury, that he had transterred several thousand dollars’ worth of bonds to bis mother, in order to escape the payment of damages. The mother, who is very wealthy, must now pay the amount awarded by the Yerdiet, according to the order of the Court, Another chapter to the scandal came up m the Court Ad- Park of Errors aud Appeals today, on a writ of error trom the Supreme Court ‘The —latier Court had reused to allow Miss Noico to Dring an action for breach of promise ot marriage for $60,000 ou the ground that when the promise wus made Brown had a wile living rem whom he bud not been divorced, It is sought now to have that decision sct aside. Both parties reside at Princeton. THE ARREST OF ELLIS. To rag Eprror ov rue Hanan 1 was greatly surprised to read in the Heap of to-day anew and wholly inaccurate version of the method employed to find and arrest Thomus Ellis, tho defaulting teller of the Park Bank. Your reporter has been mnsied by the municipal police, or whoever concocted’ the story, It is stated that there was a teomaie detective im the case, ‘this 18 abso- lutely false, (or no female bad anything to do with the matter, The arrest was made at St. Joun, N. B., by Sergeant Power, who is stationed ut Haiifux, nut oo any soap despatch, but on clews Worked up by himseli and at a distance of 200 miles. I have just returned from Hatifux, and, us stated 11 ‘our journal of November 22, gave the photograph to Yower on which he made the arrest, in which 1 om corrovorated by both Sergeant Power and Mr, Worth, President of the Park Bauk, to both of whom | can Treler 1a justification. EDWARD MALLOY. DISHONEST CARETAKERS. Willtam J, Kelly and his wite, Rose Kelly, were yes- terday arraigued before Justice Bixby at (ho Washing- ton Piace Court on acbarge of burglary. ‘The circum- stances of the case are very peculiar, The compiain- upt, Dr. Harden P. VeWeer, of No. 115 West Thiriy- fourth stroot, testified that during the month of August last himself and family leit for Greenwich, Conn., to pass the summer, leaving bis residence in charge of the prisoners, On the morning of August 20 they alarined the police of the Twouty-uinth precinct vy re- porting that during the. previous wight burglars bad entered the house and carried off properiy, consisting of clothing and jewelry, valued ut $2,000, -No sus. picion was uttuched 10 tho prisoners at the time, but ‘on the case being placed 10 the bands of two detectives they suspected there was son only tools lett behind by th an ordivary sized screwdriver and chisel—implements ‘rarely, 1 over, used by a “prolessivunal.” ‘Tho de- téctives kept a constant watch on Kelly and bis wiie, and on Wednesday obtaiped x warrant to search the rest dence of the prisoners at No, 610 Second avenue. They found there u quantity of the stolen property, consisi- ing of ciothing, lacex, &e. Justice Bixby held Kelly tor trial and discharged his wife, as Under the law sbo is supposed to have acted under the compulsion of ber busvand. sai aca a MEN WHO OUGHT TO BE PUN- ISHED. Two wretched, dranken vagrants, who gave their names as Charles Kavanagh and Philip Clare, were brought betore Justice Bixby, at the Washington Place Police Court, yesterday, by an officer of the Twenty- ninth precmct, From the statement of the officer it appeared that the raffians, who ro grossly intoxi- cuted, Were insulting respectable ladics in Thirty-tourth street, and resisted the ollicer who urrested tbom, Justice Bixby. sent thew to the isiand for three mots each. A BOSTON SHOPLIFTER, Hoeury Philips, alias Julius Steinberg, alias Hart, of No, 126 West Third street, was arrested yesterday on a charge of stealing two overcoats, valued ™s $60, from Mosers, Freeman & Goodman, of Devonshire street, Boston, The prisoncr was arrested in this city two months ago on a charge of shoplifting and discharged tor want of evidence. There are pow at loaxt a dozen ebarges of a similar character agaiest him im Boston, He consented tu go to Boston without « formal requist- tion, and vn being arraigned beiore Justice Bixby, at the Washington Place Court, was surrendered lo the custody of two Bostun detectives who jet with bim Mic » (Lneorporated.) USEL OTL-WHOLESALES IN PACKAGES TO MER rier, Apply to CHARLES ROBERT HAlG, nt, 118 Fenchurch st., Landon, England, Si tan’ Sta, Maria Novell Pi xan Sta, Maria Nor Horeuee, Italy. ed in a somthern Boautifully vi aquare. Tt offers ev: modation wikia THO station, The pi Re patronage of Bnytish . Feading wnil omatbus at the ERIGAN TRUNKS WANTED-—FOR Hutt foretgn trade: if can be done low priced larve quanti- will be requirea. Kepl closing Mustrat ico {o Me. J. SMITH, Kerreland st, Clasgow, veutland. need ‘reply. SNUG oh. proposals will be reewived wi {uoon, for furwishing 100. Gi Gate lost, also about inten Sailor's Soug Harbor, ‘The Trustees do n selves bo necopt the lowest or any bid which shall not Lé deemed for the Interest of the jnstituiion. Proposals to be addressed Thomas Groenieat, Controiler, und marked bids for grant THOMAS GREENLEE A troller. N BAUTIFUL “BETS ARTIFICIAL THETIC $5, 38; zum, lo, $1; silver Billings, Sbe, New York Dew wom, 202 Oth av., noar 10th, Lstab- lished 1651: peices ty suit the timoa, } Herald Uptown ll HOUSES, ROOMS, &C., WANTED, _ this City rooklyn. OUSE WANTE FURNISHED above Such st.. by a responsible party | ; ow if furnished tt would be eared fo ts, at i. B, JONES, station M. ANTED—A FURNISHED PRENCH PLAT, WITH W modern improvements, tor a respectable faniily for the winte: fra location, near Broadway, Address T. P. «., | room 2343 New York Hotet SUITARLE POR WINE OR ED—A STORE, sample room, resp id White ts, « 840 Enst 200k STED—-A FLAT OF SIX O« EIOUT ROOMS, jurmished or aofurnished; east elde preferred. Address, b particulars, WARDS TH, 192 Broadway. W ANTEDSBY A SINGLE GENTLEMAN. & SIFT Koom and Bedroom communicating, below 23 and ina private family. Add stating terms, must be nioderate, BACHELOR, box 11 eral ANTED—HOUSE, un st which INA Good with terma, F., bo 2) Herald of NISHED, Wo hoard: nei dress W, EK. L.. Jr. Uptown Herald oti price, &o TANTED—A PLAT, WITH EVERY CONVENIENCE iurnisbéd; Jocution must be desirable; N., Uptown Herala oil DA PULL 8S. FURNISH jon on Park, Madison or Sth ava of adjoining, fur private family; rent, $40) to $500 per month, until May L : Madison av, a Waxten. houye tm ity ; terins mm; able, Will confer wish owners ouiy. Addre. 400 st WSS fED FURNISHED ROOM, FIRST OLAS. WiTit gas and fire, convenient to Union s,Ware, for veitleman and Wite. A . With peice, € wn Herald. OMS—NOF ABOVE THIRD STORY NOR ; light housekeeping; adults; nico pie; no tenement; about $5, CASH, bux Lok blown oilice, In the NEATLY FU rent not t x HU Herald oftive. Wé&STED-A Swat. ¥ it jUUSE IN THE country, one ‘hour of City Hall, New York, and eusy of access by radi or boat: rent must be moderate, Address, stting terms, COUN PRY, box 140 Herald oltiee, ‘ountry. NISHED HOUSE IN THR d $25 por month, Address SMALL W AN iBb—A cortadiy WHTHTN TALE HOUR FROM 42a st, of on Huds bel i . furnished or not. Address, with full p. RENCE, Winchester Hotel. _ FOR SALE. Ap EiQeon stoke —DowN ‘rows, DOISG Lange business; owner leaving city; this week will seerifica fur Cush, OYD, 20 Brondway SPL’ SALE—ON LEAD wvoume, atm gr MINCHeLL, 77 Cedar CORNER RESTAURANT POR 8200; ALNO GRO- AAXceries, Chiar Stores, Liquor stores, Res Fanta, Supper Roonts, MITCH NDID- DEAD BARGAIN” “To-paY—c Liquor Store; mouigimte reat; good stand. 49 Broad A 20N Fale on Ui YY AND ICE CRE) position, Appl: Coke YARD FOL ALKA FIRST CLASS BUSE ness; established 21 yours, Apply at 421 West 24th at. MGA STABLISHED 15 YHA it /storo, extablisbed 8 years, Bakory, established 17 Grovery’ bus.n2es, $10,000 & your, SIMERS & OU Broadway, (VORNER BUTTER STORE FOK SALE—DO h trade ; splendid chance for small capital D)ietce in a Mistimos-will sel, ior $4000 cash, abont hal the inventory: everything new and mod 30,0.0 ov, preserinstons on books. Address OPPORTUNITY, box 154 Horwid office. M SALOOS 8: 167 Kast ORE FOR SALE-A CHANGE OFFI flow SALE tures of 0 F sTc 1S yours, 4 vi Pow SALE SALOON AND Theatr we woney inst, Particulars 50 Great Jew ate POR SALKE.—$175 WILL BUY ONE OF THE FIN Frait und Coufeetionery stores in town; jcvod reason for selling Address JACKSON, 246 West Loth st, SALE—A NICKLY & rooms and exte fod trade; chenp, nquire ut cizur store 475 F Fro! sabe—pownrows nau Ree BALE.—LUNCH ROOM, DOING GOOD BUST noss, will bo suld cheap Jor exh: good reisons giver tot selling, Call ut or address haraess sture, 59 Falton st, Brookly PROPERTY, full. Apply POR SALE AT A GREAT SACKIFIGE—ONE OF TWO first rate Sample and Lunch. Rooms, in tho Lest known thes in the x 124 Herald meeting ron Kast 80th st. LORE ON 3M week, Address boa House *urnishing Store, a good pluce tor Jobbing, at 38% 10th av. Y FOR SALE. SATISFACTORY Kk ASON: Apply in person, afternvon, 1,380 Sd a appl. AND COFFEE all $19 Kast id 9 1 NORRIS ST, NEAE snerifice, this da LLOYD, ROOM FOR SATE] t. HE SiMPL Broadway, jor RE 12 EAST 14TH ST. NEAR STH i fittings for sale, wiso the stock it $500 WILL PURCHASE ESTABLISHED BUSI- IU Unoss; canabie unlimited oxtension, 367 Blescker St., office, lower bell, atter LU, nM MAC ANEY JOR SATESLATNE: f Base oxy NEW YORK st. PLANER! ~CUPTERS, SILK COMPANY, 527 West } Of DRUM CYLINDER PRESS, BED 4x52; pyr ee vrder; sold ¢ pivreash. M. J. GELITOOLY, esi at, AND PAPER ter, to cut at least 40 imches, Address, with full ticulars as to name and condition of machine, box 1,557, jueton, Vv ri SE geod order, about 25 horse ANTED— and Boiler in ower. Ad. dross, with peloo'and twit particutars, 15, HERIMANN, 194 jote at., N. NTED—A SMALL ENGINE FOR A SHOW WIN. jow; must be in good ord=r and at alow price, Ad> ENGINE, 42 Fulton st., Brooklyn. FURNITURE. i URNTIURE, Kedroom Sets, Be: &e., at private sale, at aues sults, Desks, GENTLEMAN DE seli the 4 & ber sets, in wal to 8 Call residence 47 West Ldth st. VOR SALE—OIL PAINTING, BY J, Steinway Piano, with desk, Address box 215 Herald ARGEST STOCK AND LOWEST PRICES FOR FUR. Aniture and Carpets for cash of Mberal terms of payment nC COWPERTHWAIT'S 195 and 1G7 Uhathans se. Thies warerooms. 150; Carpets, Bookcase, &e, |, BROWN; a. artle top. Hisebennt and Bookease, of CARPETS A\D OILOLOTHS VERY CHRAP ISFIT at the old place, 112 Fultum st. Call or send for explan- tury price list, 3 Tt EDST EAD. HAIR AND reas, or Walnut suit, el cash ; dD. raid Uptown ‘ities reed od 77 BLEECKER ST.” NEAR RROADWAY—MONEYV m Dinmonds, Watches, J apt i, tlee ARISTTAN GENTLEMAN WIDOWER, OVEIt 30, in pertvet health, no liquor er tobacco, des! to make tance of a lany not over 4) vd health, with « view tom: fwith, RW, Dasiness, wi ing hi Ae MILLER, Address E. F. wo Obj: dence, I. T. \ FIRST CLASS CUTTER DEsIKBS A FOsLTLON Addi VT, box 16 HH otties, COMPETEN FRNOH ICB UNDERSTANDING Aithe Making of Tvelian and. French Jeo croam, Torma, &e. if class li NGINEER, BY A YOUNG ficato; is stricély temperate, Address rala‘attios. ANTED—A GOOD BOY FOR LIGHT WORK IN A private family. 157 W. ¢ 40th a A) dour. — set mit r Wi TED—A SITUATION IN A PHOTOGRAPH GAL. i ‘gnerator? ‘references turatsbea, "Address PHOTOS erator: GRAPHER, Horald ules, ut as ETD DNS FeV EY WANTEDION CHE 19T OF NEXT MONTH, & tuntion as entter ine ladies’ i first clave city releremoa, Address N, TANTED—A PERFECT MEAT CARVER, FROM to J v'eloek, With relorences, 100 Leonard t.. basement