The Portland daily press., 1875-04-08

APRIL CIVIL TERM, 1875. sYMoNDs, j., PREsID-

APRIL CIVIL TERM, 1875. sYMoNDs, j., PREsID-
ING.
WEDNEspAY.-William B. Winchester and wife
VS.. The Inhabitants of Windham.
Action to recover damages for injuries sustained by
the female plaintiff by reason of alleged defect in
the highway in the defendant town known as inc
"Chute road' The defect, alleged, was, that du-
ring the night preceding the injury drift of snow
had accumulated which was not apparent to the
plaintiff as they were driving towards it until it was
too late for them to avoid the consequences.
1t appeared in evidence that Mrs Winchester, on
the 25th of February, 1874 between and III IN the
morning, was riding with her husband and aunt
along the Chute road and just before entering the
pope road so called, the sleigh was upset and all
three thrown out. Mrs. Winchester's wrist was
fractured and physician at once sent for who at
tended to it Mr.. Winchester testified that he was
driving moderately and that his horse was managea-
BILE; that he did not the drift which occasoned
the accident until quite near to it account OF the
cave to the right and the peculiar shape the drift
that wlen he did see it it did not look formidable;
that the drift was very hard and crossed the road in
diagonal direction the point of the drift being di
Tectly towards him, rising very gradually as he ap-
preached it, and falling off abruptly the other
side. The drift was formed the night previous by
the blowing of heavy northwest wind through a
snow being dry and light it sfted in and packed
hard.
Drs. Green and Tewksbury testified that the larger
bone of the right wrist must have have been fracur
ed and the smaller bone disocated and that there is
now permanent deformity and disability which
will be accompanied with more or less pain.
The surveyor of the district lived about half mile
from The place of the accident. There was no proof
facual notice of the existence of the drift to the
ourveyor until after the accident, was there any
positive proof of actual notice TO any inhabtant OF
the town
The defendants introduced no evidence, but claimed
that there was want of on the part OF MIR.
Winchester and legal proof of notice to the town.
The Plaintiffs counsel contended that the drift was
manifest defect and the of the accidents that
the plaintiff was in the exercise of ordinary and
that sufficient time had elapsed between the forma-
ton of the drift and the hour of the accident to
thorize the jury to infer that the inhabitants of the
town had passed over or in the vicinity of the place.
and had notice of the defect which would be legal no.
tcs to the town; also that the road in the way it
was constructed necessarily created drifts at this
point whenever a northwesterly wind blew over dry
snow as it had done from time mmemorial, which of
itself would operate notice to tue town.
There was no conflict of evidence nor no material
difference in the views of eouNsel in regard the
law, The Jury found verdict in favor of the de-
PENDANTS and as is understood upon the question Of
notice.
G. w. Goddard for plaintiff.
L. NJ Webb-Strout & Gage for defendants.
Court adjourned until Friday morning at ten
o'clock.