The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1863-10-27
MA TIERS BOUT TOWN.
Supreme judicial Court.

OCTOBER TERM RICK j., PRESIDING.
MoSDAY.-In the case of Warren VS.. Viii
Hams, the jury was unable TO agree upon
verdict The papers were taken from them
and they were discharged from any further
consideration of the case.
No. 60-Leyi Morrill, VS.. Francis o. Smith.
Action of trespass for malicious prosecution.
After the award of the referees in the case
of John G. Myers ". York q Cumberland
Railroad Company, and The acceptance of that
award by the U. S. Circuit Court, which gave
Mr.. Myers about sl65,000 damages, the plain
tiff in this suit, with Hon. John NJ. Wood,
Joined the company in a bond Tor S200,00 for
the purpose of carrying up the case to the
Supreme Court at Washington. That Court
affirmed the award and remanded the case to
the Circuit Court for this District Execution
was taken out against the Company for the
amount of the award, and as the company,
after being duly called upon to pay it, de-
cined to pay It, suit was commenced in the
u. S. Circuit Court against Mr. Wood and
Mr. Morrill, ON their bond and their property
was attached to the amount of 100000.
Subsequently, by the consolidation of the de-
mands against the Railroad Company, and the
issue of new bonds, a settlement was effected
with Mr.. Myers, and his counsel in the suit
against Wood and Morrill, Withdrew from the
case. Mr.. Smith then appeared and asked
leave to prosecute the suit to Judgment but
the Court declined TO grant it and the case in
the Circuit Court was non-suted
Afterwards, Mr.. Smith, in the name of Mr..
Myers, commenced another suit in the Su-
preme Judicial Court, on the bond, against the
same parties. This suit, after being in Court
year or two, was entered non-suit, and Mr..
Morrill, commenced this action against Mr..
Smith, for malicious prosecution.
Mr.. Z. Fox opened the case for plaintiff,
contendng that Mr.. Smith had not the shadow
of right to commence such an action against
Morrill,, having no control over the bond, it
being the property of Mr.. Myers. who had re-
pudiated the suits brought upon it. He put
in as testimony the records of the Courts,
also long deposition OF A. p. Robinson, and
called to the stand Mr.. Morrill,, who testified
that by the attachment of his property on the
suits mentioned, he was injured in his credit,
and put to great expense in defending the
suits.
Mr. John A. Holmes testified that he had
heard Smith say 'before he got through with
this business he would make Morrill, wheel
barrow"
VIM. Kimball, Esq, testified that the at
fachment of Morrill's property injured his
credit at the Canal Bank.
After the evidence for the plaintiff was out,
T. NJ. Hayes, counsel for defendant, moved
for non-suit, on the ground of want of prob
able cause for malice. The Court declined to
grant the motion.
Mr.. Smith then opened the case for his de-
fence. He went into an interesting detail OF
the York & Cumberland Railroad matter with
Mr.. Myers, and gave history of his tSmith's)
transactions and dealings with Myers-con-
tending that he was entitled to bring the ac-
lions as he did, and that they were not brought
with any malicious motives, as would be
proved by the testimony he should offer, which
would principally be "from the side of the
enemy" At the conclusion OF Mr.. Smiths
opening, Court adjourned to o'clock Tuesday
morning. +. 0. j. Smith,
4. & +. Fox. L. NJ. Hayes.