The Union and journal. [volume] (Biddeford, Me.) 1858-1882, 1870-10-14
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT.
York County, Sept. Term, 1870
pANFoRfi, j., PREsipix0.

Charles 3. Sargent vs.. BENJAMIN chick. hc-
ton TO recover for supplies furnished student
at school Defence, no contract. Submitted to
Judge Judgment for defendant.
Low. Copeland, II. Kimban.
Hesekiah Drew W. Abner Staples. Referred
10 II. Fairfield.
Hamilton. Emery q Bon.
Abner Staples 70 Herekian Drew. Referred
to H. Fairfield.
Emery 4 SIN. Hamilton.
George W. woodmsn ct ais W Oliver 8 Has
ty and James L. Hasty. PlE discontnues - 10
Oliver and takes judgment W james.
Drew. Hamilton.
Simeon Day VS. Major Edgecomb. Action on
an account Verdict for defendant.
Ridlon. Aver, Clifford.
Charles w. Whittier vs. John Yeaton. Action
on account for work, and set Cd for (sl4270).
Filed. Verdict for defendant
Low. Hamilton, Drew.
No. 1873. jose Ct ais spplt. '. Libby. Ac-
ton on account. Plffs Assert that they sold
bill OF goods 10 defendant and that no refuses to
pay for them. Deft denies having bought the
goods. Verdict for def.
Burbank. Moore:
No. 623. Mcintyre vs. sayward. Action
for wages. Den Giles an account in set-od. Pif
claimed sSl. The jury found SO due him.
GIL. Piper vs. Inhabitants Of Shspleigh.
Action for damages. Pr was thrown from
sleigh and injured; claimed that highway was
defective. The case was submitted to the jury
when Il was discharged in evidence that the In
jury was received on Sunday. As plf could
show no pressing necessity for riding that day
the action was withdrawn and . COL pros en-
tered.
Clifford. . Drew.
Martha E. Mason, petitioner for habsas corpus
to obtain possession Of her two children bound
10 the Shakers Mt Alfred. The eldest, aged ff-
teen YEAR,, wished to remain with the Shakers,
and was allowed 20 to do. The youngest wishes
to 20 with her mother, and claims an informal
ity in the indentures. The Judge rem.nded
the child to the care Of the respondents.
Low. Cime.
The following divorces have been decreed this
term:
Sarah Ann Roberts, libellant vs. Samuel Rob
erts.
Kimball, Copeland. Drew, Smith.
Stephen 2. Libby. libcllsnt vs. Hannah j. Lib
by. Defendant defaulted. .. F."
Bradbury. :
Lottie N. Lord, libellant vs. Amasa Lord.
Defendant defauited. |.. ....
Copeland. :.
Fannie NJ. Yasinski, libellsnt vs. William A.
Yasinski Divorce decrced and custody Of chill
dren to libellant.
Sarah Sawyer llbellant vs.. Francis A. Saw
yer. Custody Of children decsed to the
mother.
John r. Mason libellant vs.. Mary +. Mason.
James Ferguson libellant W. Eliza Ferguson.
william II. Allen hbellant vs.. Julia A.
Allen.
Mary A. Dorman libellant vs.. George II.
Dorman.
Olive A. Manuel libellant vs.. William d.
Manuel.
4l6. Ira Grant vs. Henry c. wildex
This was IN action Of trespass qldrs clausam
for crossing plf's land in Ksnnebunkport, Den.
admitted the act alleged as trespass but justified
upon three grounds LIST. A public way across
the close described In pl's writ. 2nd. Aprivate
way BY prescription. 3rd. A way Of necessity,
claiming under this last that when plfs grsntor
received title to the cuse described for the fath-
er Of def. in 1919, he reserved . way by i'm
plication across the same, rs he had at that time
no other means Of getting to the highway.
Another ground upon which way Of necessity
was claimed was that in 1853 plrs grsntor sold
TO def. piece Of land formerly part Of the
close described in the writ nom which the def
could not get to the highway except on the deft's
close and that by that dsed such way was
granted by implication. The defendant also
claims title to part Of the land. In reply the
plf. denied any public way over his land, also
any prescriptive right Of way. To the first
ground on which way Of necessity wss claim ed
he alleged that at the time Of the conveyance In
1919 by the deit's father, he had way from
his remaining lands to the highway over the old
Kings highway, or County road, leading along
shore from the mouth Of Saco river via, Cape
Porpoise, Turbot's creek to the old wading
place At Ksnnebunk river, where in ancient
times the only means Of crossing was by wading
or by rafts. and subsequently by boats. To the
second ground by which way Of necessity was
claimed, plf replied, that at the time Of the
the conveyance in 1853 Of the plf's grantor to
deft's Il conveyed land ADJACENT to land then
owned by def and that he would enjoy the
same from his own land without crossing plre.
Any title to the land by def. was denied by plf
The case was on trial two days (see local col
umns) and resulted in . verdict for plf. in nom
inal damages, the right Of way. being the main
question.
T. II. Hubbard. Stone & Haley & Kimball.
The court adjourned without day, Tuesday,
Oct. IL.