Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-10-06
COURT OF COM MON PLEAS.


IN The case Di Charles Fell VS.. Edwin
Burnett, Josiah T.. Ice and Samuel r.
Lee. acti n for damages, the defense
uprncd tE,ir case this morning. They
claim that they did not raise the breast of
the mill dam and this case is brought for
spite. Dn trial.
Before Judge Patterson.
In the case OF A. G. Welclans, assessor
of the First ward, VS.. the county of Lam
caster, the defense called different asses
sOrS and cx-asscssorS from different parts
of the county to prove that they did their
work in shorter time than Mr.. Wclchans.
The time occupied by them was as follows:
John :. Brown. of Drumurc township, :353
days; Henry Diifendcrfcr, Mannheim, 1jt
days; Peter Sweigart, East CocalicO, 70
days; James Mccullough, Colerain, 20
days. The jury found in favor of tie
plaintiff for $40.
Isaac Mshlcr, coroner vs.. the county of
Lancaster. This was IN action brought by
the Toner I" recover pay for holding an
inquest on the body OF John Philip Hahn,
wLO died suddenly, rs was alleged in this
citN,Dm August 4. After opening the case the
p!aiutiis offered the inquisition in evidence.
The defense objected to its being admitted,
As it had not been returned to the next
quarter sessions after the inquest was
held, rs is required by the English statute
recognized by the state of Pennsylvania,
and it was therefore void and could not
be Offered as evidence Of the holding of an
inquest. The court refused to admit the
inquisi:ion, after hearing the argument of
the counsel, and, as there was no further
admissible testimony by the plaintiff the
jury under the instruction of the court,
rendered verdict in favor of the defense.
The manner of returning inquests will
probably he argued in the future, as as
motion for new trial may he made.
john NJ. Bartch for the use OF Samuel
Eruckhart and Frederick Bucher VS.. John
). Bowers. The defendant who is deaf
and dumb man, resides in West Hemptield
township. In the year 1872 he desired to
have u house built like that Of 4 neighbor
named Michael Minnicl,. Mr.. Bartch, one
Of the plaintiffs, is 4 contractor and build
er, and he was engaged to do the work.
The communication between the two men
in regard to the work and men
was had by writing on a slate and
speaking through an interI re er. There was
no written agreement. The plaintiff says
that according to the agreement he was
to construct the house and one story
kitchen, furnishing the material, for 81 300.
Before the work was done Mr.. Bowers said
that iic wished to have the kitchen built
two story and to have tin roof Oh it in
stead ot shingles. While the work was in
progress Mr.. Bowers did not like the color
the house was painted and he had
it changed four times. When the
house was finished it had cost 81, 800.
$500 more than the contract price, and
this suit is bruu.h .ht to recover, as it is claim
cd that the defendant promised to colnpcn-
safe the plaintiff for the additional expense
occasoned 10y the change
The plaintiff has transferred his claim to
Messis. Bruckhart and Bucller and the
suit is therefore brought for their use. On
trial.
jefferson kicfler vs.. the Mannheim school
district, action to recover compensation for
service rendered, during the trouble about
the Airy Dale school organ. A verdict was
taken il, favor OF the plaintiff for $50 and
costs.