Copyright USGenNet Inc., 2013, All Rights Reserved U.S. Data Repository Please read U.S. Data Repository Copyright Statement on this page: Transcribed and submitted by Linda Talbott for the US Data Repository http://www.us-data.org/ ========================================================================= U.S. Data Repository NOTICE: These electronic pages may NOT be reproduced in any format for profit or presentation by any other organization. Non-commercial organizations desiring to use this material must obtain the consent of the transcriber prior to use. Individuals desiring to use this material in their own research may do so. ========================================================================= Formatted by U.S. Data Repository Chief Archivist, Linda Talbott All of the above information must remain when copied or downloaded. ========================================================================== THE LUDINGTON RECORD, Ludington, Michigan Thursday, August 4, 1881 VOL. XIV. OLD SERIES, NO. 47 VOL. II NEW SERIES, NO. 11 THOMAS CORLISS, an Englishman aged 97, was brought into Squire SUTHERLAND'S court on Wednesday last, on a charge of threatening to shoot JAMES HONNSELL, aged 19. It appeared from evidence brought into court that Mr. CORLISS is engaged in the lucrative and odorous business of manufacturing fish oil, and sometimes, while in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, considerable friction takes place between himself and members of Mr. HONNSELL'S family. Mr. CORLISS being one of the Hearts of Oak, proposed to try conclusions with Mr. HONNSELL, the elder, and promised to abide by the decision reached, and take a back seat if whipped. Failing to get satisfaction in that way, he threatened to shoot the complainent. Mr. HONNSELL, the younger, was nervous while in the neighborhood of the irate Briton, being apprehensive that a charge of buckshot would be sent his way at a time when it would not be convenient; hence the complaint. WHEELER & BISHOP were for the defendent. Jury brought in a verdict of not guilty, and that the complaint was a malicious accusation. Prisoner was dis- charged and complainent paid costs. ===========================================================================