The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1875-11-19
Superior Court.

NOtEMbEh CltlL TERM, 1910. SYMONDS, Js PRE-
SIDING.
THURsDAY-Augusta NJ. Stimson VS.. Hiram Skill
lin and Jacob Clark
This /, action of Qatare caasu for breaking and
entering the premises Of the plaintiff and carrying
away seventy-seven Gu ic yards of granite. in tie
blasting Of which the foundation of plaintiffs brick
house. situated in Gray, was badly shaken and its
walls cracked and otherwise damaged. At the time
OF the alleged trespass the defendant and one An
drew Lowe, since deceased, were selectmen of Gray.
The plaintiffs house is situated on the old Port
la road near Gray Corner, about fourteen feet
back from the line Of the road. The yard in front OF
the house was opened and not fenced.
The testimony for the plaintiff was to the effect
that in front of the house was rock or boulder in
bedded in the EARTH the bare visible part of which
extended to the wrought part of the road and some
six or eight feet into the dooryard. 1t was foot
and half two feet in the highest part above the
surface of the ground. Upon excavatng it it turned
out to be about eight feet in depth twenty IN length
and eight or nine feet in width.
In August, 1869, the defendants in their capacity
as seectmen, went to remove this portion of the
rock above the surface for the purpose of improving
the highway and thereby benefting public travel
To accomplish this the defendants now admit that it
was only necessary to take of about three feet of the
VI eAO ioCh, put dltCH lOuUtAuS tuc duouS
1t, see ng its Dimensions and finding it was good
quality OF granite and would rift well, they con-
tinued and took out the whole boulder containing
about IT cubic yards of granite. small portion of
this they used for the abutment to bridge and the
remainder for a fence wall to a cemetery.
The plaintiff testified that SkiIlin, one of the de-
fendants told her after work began the rock that
they were about to do little asting and she better
open the doors and windows to prevent the breaking
Of glass, and that if they did any damage they would
pay for III that they worked upon the rock about two
weeks, during which time they put in between six
and dozen blasts; that some were very heavy and
shook the house, throwing bricks and mortar down
the chimney and dishes in the pantry; that at one
time just before blast Skiln told her she better
take the children and 60 out into the she'd which
she did; that she noticed no particular cracks or
damage at the time, except one day she found the
casing to the front door cracked off and at night
when her husband came home called his attention
to it.
The plaintiffs testimony was further to the effect
that in removing the stone they excayated and
blasted within six eight feet of the house, and in
doing that the foundation Of the house disturbed
the outside walls badly cracked and many of the
doors In the house could not be closed. The DANA
ges claimed are one thousand dollars.
1uo ucicHudutS utuy III tuo ursI place tuaC tnoy
caused any damage to the house whatever hat there
was no blasting as such done; that this rock was
split up by drilling small holes and using wedges;
that after making the crack, and for the purpose of
throwing of the piece they put in small amount of
powder at one end Of the seam put little dirt upon
it and exploded it, which threw of the junk about
two inches; that they used powder but five or six
times and in all about six pounds; that the explo-
zion each time was very light and they took all the
precautions necessary.
Skillin testified that after each explosion he asked
Mrs. Stimson If any damage was done, and each
time she replied there not; this Mrs. Stimson de-
MED.
The defendants deny that the rock was in front Of
plaintiffs house on plaintiffs land, but was fur
Their to the north and laid parallel to the road that
the excavation did not come within twenty feet of the
house.
Defendants also put in considerable testimony
tending to show license On the part Of the plaintiff
or through her husband her agent; that at differ.
ent times he had requestd the selectmen to remove
this stone and offered to bear part of the expenses
at another time offered to take it out himself fol
twenty-five dollars, to be allowed on his highway
tax; and that at one time after the rock re-
moved, lie said he thought the removal Of the rock
had improved his premises five hundred dollars.
az W Iuc udindSe 70 TUG uOust uticuuduts Say II
was built on poor foundation, and the most Of thu
cracks have been in the walls ever since it was built
about thirty-fve years.
Both the plaintiff and her husband den led any
license or permission their part to the defendants
to do what they did, and say that whatever PROPOSE
tons were made, were only for the removal of thai
part of the stone which projected above the ground
The case was tried last December and the jur,
disagreed, standing six and six. At this trial tn
same result followed the jury stan ing seven for tn
defendants and five for the pIaintif.
Strout g. Holmes-Frank for plaintiff.
Viuton for defendants.
Isaac Smith, Jr., We. City Of Portland. Action It
recover damages alleged to have been sustained tt
person and property by reason Of an alleged defec
in the highway on the corner of Bowdoin street an
Western Promenade Damages claimed four thou
sand dollars. Testimony nearly closed.
Motley q Blethen for plaintiff.
T. B. Reed for City.