The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-04-17
THE COURTS.
Penalty Of Keeping Playful Dogs in Lager
Beer Saloons.
THE ANCIENT CAPILLARY REMEDY.
Making Henry Ward Beecher Liable for
Debts Of the Christian Union.
SUIT AGAINST CONGRESSMAN WILLIS.

Fons,ine PAstcr, q middle aged man and blacksmith.
an Tho oath OF juno, 1875, quietly pursuing bis
peaceful way In wagon, in the vicinity OF lager beer
saloon kept by Thomas Koner when, as he alleges he
was severely bitten in the hand by dog owned oy
Kohler, which jumped on the wagon seat FOR tho
Injuries thus sustained by him Pnster brought SUIT
against Kohler 81 900 damages, which SUIT
came 10 trial yesterday, before Judge Axer, IN tue
Marine Court In his complaint Phster charged that
Koher wrongluy kept dog. knowing him TO % OF .
ferocous disposition and accustomed to attack and
bite mankind that he wrongtully and neg'igenily
allowed this dog to large, and that this was the
same dog which Inflicted the injuries charged in tho
complant Tho answer denied all these allegations,
so far as they related TO tho defendants dog. Tho
plainlin In ,estiying mis- own behalf, stated That
lie was accustomed to refresh himself with an occa-
siopal glass OF beer in defendants place, and knew
IL we'll ON the referred TO IN the sui; he was
bitten by the defendants dog in front CT the defend
ants premises After the injury plaintiff went into
tho defendants place and made known tho TACT TO him.
Defendant thereupon consolcd plaintiff by the as.
surance that the blte would amount to anything,
as the same dog had bitten others aud no bad effects
had cnsucd To make assurance doubly sure how.
ever Kohler furnished brandy to apply TO the
wound his good procured some hairs from the
offending dog aud applied them Also ana no.n '9se'nr'
bound up the wound OF the complaining InsteE
Other witnesses were examined, whose testimony was
intended show admissions aud acts on the part u
tho defendant connrmatory OF plantls statements,
and with this plaintiffs case was ABOUT 10 DC cose',
when one OF the Jurors be.hought him oil question
he wished ask him. The latter was promptly re-
caiiea and the juror asked:-
..vos' dot hair vol Mrs Koher put on your hand
taken iron dc same dog vot bite you ~
abe same dog, y responded plaintiff.
All the Jurors nodded their satisfaction at this
answer and Pnstcr was permitted retire from the
w,tness stand For the defence the first
called to TESTIFY was the defendant IN person In
questions put TO INN by counsel ne ADMIT
"a had nm IL.
SIN all dog similar TO that against which tho
en- arge and enmty to all mank ind was
made; he was not u Spitz dog; he was q mo breed
dog,: he was procured by his boy TO play with had
never bitten person and It was never admitted ne
mud, When Pllster into the saloon and com
planned oil having been bitten by the dog the defend
ant said that could and IN confirmation OF this
pointed the dog apparently sleeping the sleep OF IN
noccnce under the table.
HIS counsel asked :-"How was he lyingr
.svoli, he lard just like dog" answered Kohlcr
ssDid he have his head on his pawsE continued
counsel.
.sYesn was the response.
Kohler continued his testimony TO tho effect that to
his knowledge his te 'red brown" dog had been ly.
ing under the table iuy half al hour before Pnster
came in and could not have gone out without his
knowledge. Moreover there another, an owner
less dog across The street which resembled his dog
very much THIS dog had since moved away, he knew
not where and lett be inferred that his inolend-
ing ana domesticatcd canine was being charged
the crimes oil another, which had become an ire
spons ibe tramp. Other witnesses called TO con-
firm the theory OF the defendant that the dog could
have been out OF the saloon, even for "two Gee
ton by him sidewalk. They testified further
that when plaintiff first showed his wound II was a
mere slight lndenaton OF tho flesh, but that II had
subsequently become irritatcd. THIS irritation, de-
iendant's counsel offered to show, was made by the
plaintiff himself In order to draw money from benefit
societies 10 which belonged but the Court ruled 1t
While the defendant and his witnesses were testify
Ing as the mpossbiIty OF the dog under the table
getting out OF sight long enough to commit the injury
charged against him. several OF the jurors took occa-
SION TO cross-examine them particularly that point,
ana wanted to know II 1t was not possible that this
breed' might have momentarily escaped their no.
tcc while they INDUCING in lager or friendly con-
vcrsaii0n. But they ali thought not ana one moro
positive than other backed opinion by the argu
ment tho dog lying on Mrs. konlcr's dress,
the last place dog Is likely TO quit Tor more agrees
ve operations All the preceding testimony as 10 the
log's harmcssncss confirmed by that OF the de-
iendants young son, who SAID he bought him Tor ten
cents and '.played mt him"
otter summing up OF the case by Mr.. Joseph A.
Kent Tor plaintiff aud Mr.. George f. Langbcin Tor de-
Iendant and the charge OF Judge Akcr the jury iound
after litllo elaboration, verdict IN favor oil plaintiff
iur 5000