Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1872-10-01
=. j. Courf--.Septemoe,. H.. 1872.
DANroRrn. j. rREsuDING
ond WEEK.


range ]. in tie town OF Bethel. Tho.
southern boundary Of lot q was Identical
with the south line of Bethel The dat
was tho owner of the northerly part oil
lot No. 1 in the lst range il Albany, ana
claimed that there was curve IN nc
| line of Bethetnorthward thereby max
ing the south line OF Bethel crooked
ifius. Tbs plaintiff claimed straight
lins, starting from the corner of Mason
: and Bethel, thence eastwsrdy TO the
northwest corner Of Greenwood, leaving
small part of Songu pond in Bethel. i.
Verde. Tor pm
Hsmnions, Frye. Gibson. Foster.
Oren Stevens v Inhabitants OF Rum.
ford.
Action OF Assnmpsit 60 recover the sum
OF s90.50 fo medical aid aud medicines
furnished certain alleged paupers in the
town OF Rumiord Defendants pleaded
tender OF So. 90. and the general issue.
Verdict for plaintiff for s75.
Davis. Bolster
/ Chas. II Harris in review =. Canadian
Express Co
} This was on trial four wears ago and
verdict rendered for detis arewsr'l was
granted and tho case nov comes w Tor
trial the second time PHI alleges he
sent II pAcSago OF money containing
s34S. 81 from Newry Corner by his father,
John Harris to tho Express Cos Agent
nj Bethel, Juno 1t. 1866, directed 10 lst
National Bank, Portland; that the pack
age arrived tho next day in Portland,
and when opcned ~ The Teller OF tho
Bank i. was $50 short piG ccntsads
that il was takan bV Cos. Agents deIts
contend That all the money WAS delivered
to the Bank in Portland that was deliver
ed TO their Agent ut Bethel; mucA owl
dence ON either side Was introduced, yer,
conflicting IN It's nature Verdict guilty
S122. SO
Hammons. Virgin. Foster
TIE PERU TAN CASE.
Statey. Dems' +. Bishop, Peru.
Indictment for Assault and Battery and
fuse imprisonment, on the 2Sth OF Aug
last, al Daniel Hall, Collector OF Peru,
while engaged in the discharge OF hii
official duties.
The only witness tor The government.
was Daniel Hail. Collector, who stated
that kc bad school iaN OF about sS0.00
against dslt. which he had repeatedly
called Tor, bot could mol get hat on the
2Sih OF August he called on def, and do
mauded tho tax OF property 10 oc iuraed
out asked def. il lac bad any choice
wha, property no took; he said he had
not Ao went into the barn, sud was
taking ont lhc horse, when deli shut the
door ANA locked il; finding he could not
gsl the horse out he looked around and
found trap door, which he lifted, and
found stairs leading into The cellar, which
he went down and then got out; deit.
tainted him, and said You didn't get
anything, did YOU? I'm bound 10 hinder
you all can as long as you and live.
Dslt. was first Sslcctman, who made tho
TAX and signed the warrant.
Def took the stand, aud substantially
admitted Halls statement, saying that his
horse was exempt from attachment, and
he shut his stable door 10 save the horse
he had no oxen at the time, and only two
horses worth about $500 On cross cN-
animation admitted that he did not state
to the officer that nc claimed The horse -
exempt from attachment
Nh. Harlow. loy delt, pGt ia some Ian
and argued that there vrs no assault,
as there WI, no intent to 10 violence, and
that therc was no imprisonment because
Hall had 81 way Of getting ont OF the
barn, and that HALLS Warrant a. Collect
or did not aathorihc him To take property
exempt from attachment
Tie CO. Any in reply, denied The in
ference. Of Mr.. Harlow, and claimed
HAT dci,. had no right to use force in
preventing an officer from taxing proper
" even if the property was exempt from
attachment; his remedy was to repleyy
it; that dcit. should have claimed that
Tie horse was exempt from attachment,
at the time, TO avail himself OF the bono
lit of il. The Statutes Of the State do
no, Justify such course A. dclt resort
cd to against an officer in the discharge
OF his duties
Judge Danforth. in his charge, said
the first question was, was the property
exempt from taxation? If he had no
oxen, two horses, not worth over $500,
are exempt Then, if exempt, did def.
waive his right, by not clsiming'to have
his horse exempted? II exempt, and
not waived, def. had right to close tho
door, but he had no right to restrain the
officer; that would constitute an Assault
and Battery. 1t might be Il simple as
sault, if the officer was not in the dis.
charge OF his official duties rightlully.
The Jury found the def. guilty OF a
simple Assault and Battery. Fine one
dollar and costs
Foster, Co. Atty. +. G. Harlow.
SMITHS RAILROAD.
Rail Road Commissioners y. Z. 4 o.
c. r. K. Co.
This is a petition Tor an fgu'ction
against the defendant Co. to prevent