Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1870-01-01
TIE STEARNS-SAMPSON CASE.
HALLowELL, Dec. 81, 1876

published in q recent paper, signed by L0ulsa
p. Stearns and others, would require no COM
ment, if the parties to the controversy and
the facts In the case were as we'll known to all
your readers, as they are to most Of the COM
muni,y at Hallowell. In the absence CT Mr..
Sampson, I feel it my duty to make brief
statement of the case.
Mr.. Sampson desiring to purchase house
in Hallowell for his own use, met with Benz.
Sewall, Esq. of Boston, who I understand is
an old and respected citizen Of that city, and
who informed him that he owned and would
sell the house in lIallowen built by Doctor
Amos Nourse, and for some years past occu-
pied by the family OF George b. Stearns. MIR.
Sampson being pleased with the situation of
the house, had the record title of Mr.. Sewall
| examined, and found that Mr.. Sewall had
warranty deed from George b. Stearns, dated
| June ~, 1913, the dover of Mrs. Stearns re-
| leased, and the deed duly recorded 1t was
| full and complete warranty, subject, however,
| to a mortgage given by Stearns to l.. Shaw
| and others, dated April &c. ls4S. This mort
| gage was subsequently, assigned by the mort
w
assigned to Sewall. Finding the title Of Mr..
| Sewall perfect, Mr.. Sampson purchased the
| property and took warranty deed from Mr..
Sewall. paying him $1,000.
About the time of this purchase, he called
| on Mrs. Stearns. informed her of it, and re.
| quested her to name the time she would re-
move from the house. She informed him that
| she would require some three or four weeks.
| He asked her if she would have any OBJ
| lection to his making some repairs to. the
| house in the meantime. and she gave her as
sent. Mrs. s. commenced packing her fiirni-
| ture. and soon after George T. Stcarns ar
| rived, and assisted her in so doing. Mr..
| Sampson employed some men. and erected a
staging around the house, part of it, for
| the purpose of making repairs. In the mean
| time he had bought an adjoining lot at cost
| of some $500.
| g.. When the furniture was nearly boxed up
| for removal Mr.. George b. Stearls arrived in
| town. and Immediately informed Mr.. Sampson
| that he could not have the house. as he in
tended to keep it himself. The staging was
| taken down, it is supposed by Mr.. Stearns or
| his orders, and the furniture unpacked.
Mr.. Simpsons next step was to give Mr..
| Stearns written notice to quit the premises in
| thirty days. This period expired about the
| Goth of November. Soon after this, Mr..
| Sampson went to Boston, and saw Mr.. Sewall,
and took the legal advice of Henry W. Paine,
Esq, formerly of Hallowell.
The question presented itself in this shape !:
| Should Mr.. Sampson bring a writ of entry for
possession of his property, (Which he had
| bought and paid for, without anticipating any
| difficulty in obtaining possession it is well
known that as law and Justice are now admin
| istered in our courts, it would require at
| least three years to bring the litigation to an
end. In the mean time his opponent would
| be occupying the premises. and in any court
was VIGOROUSLY irresponsible for either rent
| or cost
Mr.. Sampson was advised by Mr.. Paine to
| p 'oceed at once to take the windows out of
| the house, thereby rendering it uninhabitable.
Instead of doing this however, he employed
men to remove the furniture of Mr.. Stearns,
and store it in a safe place He requested :he
| ladies to remove, but used no force towards
them, instructing his employees, on the con-
trary to treat them with all proper courtesy.
Those who know Mr.. Sampson will need no
! assurances that the description of his con-
| duct given by the other parties is grossly col
| ored and exaggerated. 1t is true he employed
| the City Marshal of Hallowell to prevent the
8 tbn, no
premises, as he had right to do. Some esti-
| mate of the value OF the statement published
last week may be formed from the fact that
Mr.. Best who signs the paper was IN town but
two or three days, and never in the house.
Mr.. Geo. T. Stearns was not allowed to enter
the house. and was not in town when the fur
niture WAS removed. and the ladies of course
were in their own room, where they kept
closed doors, alleging sickness.
If Mr.. Sewall has sold the property without
legal right, Mr.. Sampson was not aware of it,
and Mr.. Sewall is abundantly responsible for
what he has done. If Mr. Sampson has ex-
ceeded the provisions of law in obtaining pos
session of his property, that is a matter for
the courts to settle.
Blu. it may be asked, why did these ladies
subject themselves to the inconvenience of re-
naming in Mr.. SIMPSONS house thus persist
emily after the furniture was mostly removed!
If they had right of action against Mr..
Sampson, it was complete after he had re-
moved their furniture, and placed family in
the house. can imagine no reason why they
remained, except that it was by the advise of
lawyers, who are oftentmes, (if all stories are
true like Satan himself, very ready to get
out again. JUsTIcE.