The Portland daily press., 1874-05-07
Superior Court.

APRIL CIVIL TERM, 1874, syMoNDs, j., PRESIDING
WEDNEspAy.-George B. Loring ct ais. VS.. Maine
Steamship Company. This was ad action on the case
against defendant company common carriers to re-
cover tho value of geo bundles Of paper OF the
alleged value of 1856, belonging to the plaintiffs,
and lost by the fire of August 9, 1873.
The case is one of great Importance not only on
account of the amount at ISSUE but because of the
principles Of law involved. 1t in proof that in
August 1878, the plaintiffs purchased Of parties in
New York two hundred and twenty-one bundles OF
room paper to be delivered at defendants boat in
New York. 1t was admitted that defendants were
common carriers and that they received the goods In
New York for transportation. The goods arrived IN
Portland and were unloaded upon the company
wharf. A fire broke out on the company's wharf at
about two o'clock in the afternoon, and the goods
were destroyed with the exception of twenty-one
bundles delivered to the plaintiffs before the fire. No
bill of lading was given for the goods, but receipt
was taken New York. 1t was shown that the
plaintiffs iu the habit of receiving goods by de-
fendants steamers, and that sometimes bill OF lad
ing was given containing exemption OF loss by fire
on the boat and on the wharf.
The fire broke out in lot of excelsior piled on de-
fendants wharf for transportation and spread with
great rapidity and violence The origin of the fire
was unknown.
The defendants contended that they were exempt
from liability by the statute Of 1851 exempting ship
owners from liability by reason of accidental fire
happening shipboard that notice of the arrival OF
the had been given to the consgnees and the
goods unoaded upon the wharf, and the liability of
the carrier thereby terminated, and that the
aintiffs by their of dealing had implicitly
entered into contract by which their liability was
restricted to fire. These positions were contro-
verted by the plaintiffs, who further contended that
their loss happened through the negligence of the
defendants in receiving upon their wharf excelsior,
which was shown to be exceedingly combustible, and
not having upon the wAarf any adequate appliances
for the extnguishment of fire, it being shown that
the main hose where the fire broke out was not
attached to the water pipe, and had no nozzle at
tached and was not ready for immediate use, and
that the defendants could not exempt themselves
from the result of their negligence.
The case was carefully tried to the jury and YER
dict was returned for the plaintiffs for the sum Of
$3e23.4s.
Strout g. Holmes for plaintiffs.
N. Webb for defendant.
The traverse jury were then discharged from furth
er attendance.
After the jury retired to their room they sent in by
the officer paper in which they expressed their sin
cere thanks to his Honor, Judge Symonds, for his
kindness and consideration toward them during the
two terms they had been in attendance.
MHY CRIMINAL TERM, 1s7a-sYMoNDs j., PREsID-
ING.
WEpNEspAY-The following gentlemen compose
the Two new traverse juries for the May term:
First Jury-Adam Lemont, Foreman, Portland;
Eben Field Windham; Merrill L. Files, Gorham
Abisha Flint, Baldwin; William II. Foster, var
mouth; Jacob Frost, Bridgton, Henry G. Greenleaf,
Yarmouth; Josiah Graffam,- Scarborough; Frank
H. Grant, westbrook; Edward James. Freeport;
Hiram James, Deerng; Augutuss c. Jones, Deering
Second Jury-Daniel w. Nash, Foreman, Port
land; VIM Melaugh, John Murch, Portland; Fran
els j. Orr, Harpswell; John Poland, David Plum
mer, I'd, Cape Elizabeth; Albert Rideout, Cumber,
land; Howard L. mpson, Harrison; Nathaniel
Shaw, Windham; Simeon Skilin, Gray; Freeman
Strout, Raymond; Elias F. Parker, Standish
Observation-Disclosures True, North Yarmouth
Samuel Watts. Falmouth; George 5. Richardson
Brunswick; John Wells, New Gloucester; Geo. d.
Excused-Wm c. Brown, westbrook; Washin &
ton Chaplin, jr., Naples; James Mains, Otsfeld
VIM H. Morrow, CascO; Charles w. Pckard, Port
land; Albion P. Woodside, Brunswick.
Counsel are requested to take notice that appeal
cases (criminaD will be in order tomorrow Thurs
day morning at O'clock and will be dispos ed Of
without delay.