Delaware Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1843-1874, 1866-05-21

Thomas T. Tasker sfirmed--I was the own |
or Of the property through which Washington |
Avenue was opened. Mr.. Shaw and myself |
opened II, and we have kept 1t In repair since. |
1t was opened for the purpose of making
read to be used by any one who chose 70
travel IL. There are three dwelling houses
built upon 1t.
Court adjourned till Thursday morning.
THuRsDAy MoRsIza. - Court met at ten
O'Clock.
Thomas NJ. Ogie, vs p. W. b B. R. R. Co.,
continued. Mr.. Booth offered in evidence the
record Of the deeds, after which he opened the
argument before the Jury. he claimed that
the plaintiff had proven that 1t was necessary
for him to pass along the avenue, and that 1t
had beer obstructed by the railroad company.
In regard to the avenue being public road,
Mr.. Tasker had testified that 1t was intended
for public use, and buildings had been erected
thereon, and this made it . public road. The
p. W. B. B. r. Go. had control of this road,
and had the right to run their cars over the
track, but they had no right to leave them
standing across public road. The plaintiff
knew the running time of the cars, and did
not stop before crossing the track to look out
for passing train. He had quiet horse, but
when he saw the coal cars, she became fright
ened, and ran down the embankment, throw
ing him out, and 1t was only through the
breaking Of the top from the wagon that his
life was saved. The only means through which
the proper amount of damages could be arri-
we'd at, was for each juryman to decide how
great q sum he would take to place himself In
such a position as the plaintiff had been In.
Mr.. Harrington for the defence, said there
could not be damages allowed the plaintiff I'M
| less he proved that 1t was caused by the neg
| ligence of the company. The only testimony
showing negligence was that given by Howard
0gle, aud his statement was too Indefinite for
any jury to award damages upon. The ques
| tion 10 be determined was whether the car WAS
In Its proper position. The plaintiff had shown
that 1t did not prevent them from passing. 1t
had been placed there for the benefit of Messrs
Tasksr Shaw, who were the owners of the
land on which 1t stood. He claimed that Mr..
Ogle did not use due caution In approaching
| the railroad, and thus contributed to the ac-
cident. The law was plain that where the
plaintiff contributed by his negligence to the
accident he could not recover.
John Stockline, of Delaware City, indicted
for selling liquor on Sunday, was fined $40 and
costs.
Court adjourned till 3 o'clock.
THURSDAY AFrERNooN.-M Booth made
the closing argument In the case of Thomas
N. Ogle va. the P. W. & B. Railroad Company.
Chief Justice Gilpin charged the Jury
/ He said that this was an action TO recover
damages sustained by the plaintiff through the
alleged default and negligence of the Oompa-
ny, and that 1t turned upon the question of
negligence, which involved the rights of both
parties. If no negligence was attributable to
| the defendant then the verdict must be for the
defendant. II the plaintiff exhibited any neg
| ligence the verdict must be for the defendant,
for the jury cannot go Into measuring the
comparative negligence Of the two; in this
State there are four methods of making public
roads, vis:-By act of the Legislature; under
the general laws OF the State, the usual way
the uninterrupted use for twenty years, and by
dedication. The vital principle of this last
method OF making public roads Ia the intention
Of the owners OF the land to dedicate the road
to the nee of the public, and the acceptance
of 1t as a road. Messrs. Tasker & Shaw
intended to give Washington Avenue to the
public, but they could not give tina. party the
part of the Avenue which belonged to the
Railroad Company. That land was the fee
simple, 80 years ago, Of the New Castle and
Frenchtown Turnpike Company which after
wards became the New Castle and Frenchto wi
Turnpike and Railroad Company, and was
leased by them to the P. W, & b, Railroad 90.
the defendants in this case, and there fore
they had the right to leave cars across tn,
whole of the Avenue II they wanted to.
The jury returned verdict for the defe nd
ants, after which Uoar: adjourned till Friday
morning,
FRIDAy MORNING Court met at 10 O'Clock
Vincent Erhart, indicted for selling liquol
without license, was fined $40 and costs,
, Levi b. Moore use Of Reed vs. bennett & Gal
lagher. Bradford Higgins for plaintiff, an,
Gordon for defence. This was an action IL
debt on property bond given to Levi B
Moore, while sheriff, by James Bennett will
Daniel Gallagher as security. Mr.. Higgu
claimed Judgment for $ll5 on the bond ant
costs, with interest from December 5, 1854
After offering the bond in evidence he reste(
! his case.
Mr.. Gordon said he could not 20 beyon,
the bond aud offered no testimony in defence
! and the jury returned a verdict tor $l77l5.
, William Dolson vs. Jacob Hill. Gordon TO
( plaintiff; George B. Rodney for defence. Thi
was an action of trssspass by assault and bal
t terry.
Q Mr.. Gordon said be expected to prove tina
10 the tall OF 1864, Mr.. Hill sold to Mr.. Dolso
all the hoop poles on a certain property an
, he cut poles from the property. Soon after th
sale hoop poles went up $50 per 1000 10 val
ue; 10 March, 1865, while the plaintiff wa
cutting poles, as usual Mr.. Hill came up wit
pistol in maud and threatened to shoot him
The man who was with MIN ran away, an
left them il the field; afterwards Mr.. Hill bea
him in a shocking manner.
William Henderson, sworn-I was employe
by Mr.. Dolson to help him cut hoop poles Of
Mr.. Hills farm; was working with him o.
the 10th OF March, when Mr. Hill came up /
us with pistol In his hand and said to Nj
7 Dolson "Damn yeu, I've got you just where
want YOU" he also told me he had ball 70
: for me too and ran away for fear he woult
} shoot me; | went over to Mrs. Southell's abou
half mile from the place; MIR. Dolsor wa
! boarding there at the time; he came HON
! with his head bleeding, and walking with tn
. assistance OF pole; his wounds were dresser
D by Mrs. Southell; Mr.. Hill had seen us cuttip
the poles, and one time said we were leavin
d the stumps too high from the ground,
o Cross-examined-Mr. Hill did not tell M
Hill that he had forwarned him from comm
therei he asked whose oxen we were using
1t Mr.. DolsoR told him they belonged to Mr.. O.,
10 eltreei never heard Hill forbid Dolson cuttin
the poles.
o Philip Mcdowell, sworn-I have been I'm,
70 Ing hoop poles from Mr.. Dolson he general
IS buys them standing in the woods 10 Marc
ri 1865, Mr.. Hill came and told me he wished
d would stop Dolson from cutting hoop poles
I'd his land he said he had cut some polcs
ID land that did not belong to him Mr., Dolls,
IN had furnished me with some poles from
'e Hills land; told Hill all the trouble betwe
him and Dolson was that poles had gone
r. since the purchase he said he had sold d
10 poles to Mr.. Dolson, and be had paid for the
but he should not have them; hoop poles h,
10 gone up in price, $50 on one kind and $40
l SIS on another; about year ago asked N
re Hill why be beat Mr.. Dolson; he said be b.
r. been drinking, but he was sorry it mad occu
'r red, as he aud Dolson were good friends b
at fore the affair; be said Dolson had bought
81 hoop poles and paid for the whole of them;
q admitted that he had beaten Dolson, but
be wanted to make it up with him; saw Mr. Dr.
sou about three weeks after the affair." he b
IT, his head tied up.