The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1876-12-12

buildings were destroyed by mob, for three.
tourths of their value and by the same statutes
! Tue town was entitled TO recover from the Of
lenders the amount thus paid. The party in
| lured notified the town authorities that he in
Geuded to hold the town accountable to him.
| Under such circumstances it would seem to be
| the Imperative duty Of the agent to adopt all
necessary precautionary measures, not only to
ascertain whether the towa could successfully
resist the demand, but also to seek out the Of
tenders and discover whether they could re
spond TO the claiha of the town against them for
an indemnity. Such Investigations, ordinarily
could not be judciousy prosecuted by town
agent without aid from other sources; for the
detection of criminals the services Of those ex-
perienced IN such matters are frequently of
great assistance and the judicial investigations
Ia TINS state, of more than one Offense have
made very manifest the skill and experience of
tne plaintiff in his calling, and that through his
aid notorious offenders have been brought to
Justice. Under the instructions the Jury must
nave found that the Breitmans having made
their claim against Bristol, its town agent en-
ployed the plaintiff to assist in detecting the Of
lenders, that indemnity might be had from
them, aud for his services so rendered we
think the to wn was responsible. The effect of
the vote of the town at the meeting IN March
1872, upon the towns liability, it is not necessa.
ry tor US to determine, as we are of opinion
that excluding such VOTE upon the other testi-
mony in the cause, the defendants are liable to
the plaintiff for the value of his services.
1t is said the damages are excessive The
claim in the writ is for 1855 40 for personal ser
vices, at the rate of $40 per day and expenses.
In this amount is included services for seven
days, from July 90. which it is manifest should
not be charged, amounting to $40. and also $42
for board and horse hire for 65 days. which ln-
cudes the % days plaintiff was in the employ
OF the Breitmans The proper proportion Of
this $40, for the 25 days, should be charged to
Bretmans, amounting to $16.15 1t is also said |
that for his time and expenses, attending before |
the Grand Jury, amounting 10 $6556, the de. |
PENDANTS are not liable. Plaintiff was recog- |
nized to appear before the Grad Jury to testi- |
~ against the parties bsuud over for this Of |
Tense, and he swears that he has always been |
paid for his time on such occasions and we |
think it could hardly be expected that hs would |
attend before the jury without being compen- |
stated at the usual rate by his employer. The |
only deductions we should make from his claim |
would be the $3.50 Is, leaving principal of |
.42. A demand was made on Blaney by |
plaintiff in full of 49, 8. and again ia spring of
1869 and we are of the opinion that the jury were
authorized to allow interest from the demand,
if they saw fit. their verdict $645 80, indicates
that they probably deducted the entlre $42 from
the claim, instead of proportonate part there
OF, but have allowed interest from the demand
10 spring of 1869 or for something over seven
years. On the whole, therefore, we are of opin-
lon that the defendants have no cause to Gem
plain of the amount. and that the motion for
new trial must be oyerruled and Judgment on
verdict