New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-04-03

n prTr1s IrtTcHeg LARDAULET.

Mr. HATCH's WRATH WHEN HE DlsCOVhBhD ihAi
fla coLcIIMAN HAD TAKEN PRESENTS FROM THE
CARRIAGE MAKERs-ARGUMENTs OK APPEM-
The suit of Brewster g. Co.. (of Broom-st.)
the caTriGge maker, aiist RI us Ia eh TO eeVer mo
sum Of 445 42alcped 10 be dae the painhs ior ahor
and services ?nd Il goods sold betWrel 1873 ara 1877
came before GcnrIal Term Of the Marine Court yes
,erday on an appeal from judgment rendered on hHl
before Judge AcEer last December. he" Ulai WAC
asked on the ground That errors were commit'eu
n certain rulings, and also that Judge Alker erred III
denying request to charge Tae appeal was heiiu Nc
ere Judges Shea Sheridan and Halves. Adolphus d.
Pane R. bert Seweil, and Henry 3. Bennett alpclrcu
for Mr. Hatch John +. Cr0nly, W. H. Arnoux anu j.
H. Drake f,r the plaintiff The action was eOEmehoeH
during the year 1877 and in the first trial verdict was
rendered in favor Brewster Co. SIR Hatch carrea
the case before the General Term Of the Marine Court
where fhn verdict was affirmed. Tie Common fiea5
General Term, aftsrWaid Get aside the Vernet' anu
ordered new trial. On the second trial Brewster
Co. obtained another verdict, from when the peSen'
appeal Is taken. ,.,.
lars OF the caim The ON covers ten pages Of priht"
NATTER extending years OF time ana sets lorh
n great variety OF repairs to Mr. Hatchs Carriages su0"
as oy erhaulng fOppcTs smoothing down bruises uR
eninc springs putting in new spok"s. recovering u'su-
boards etc. The front springs appear 30 hYo been re-
norcd scven tin,ea In his answer Mr.. Hateh ciaims
that the charges for certain anauet sold were cXor-
bitaut and far IN OF Its value tlat inc IoP'
embraced in the bill of particulars were rendered heee
sary y reason OF nieriOt character OF Inc Vehces
remarked winch plaintiff mad sold him under roPfc-
scntions TIN, they frstcass; that the repairs
were souask!fuly and neggeny made that they were
OF no value TO lin.
Mr. Hatch when ca loi rs n witness on the last trial.
said that he had not about the repairs mill few
DAYS before ths sui, WIS begun He claimed that his
coacninan had been improperly dealt with by the plain
TIL who had made him presents and that this accounted
far the frequent repars and large bills The planth
admit cd making the presents, but clalmed ihat u "S
n custom imported from Europe u MAKE sacn gus 10
coaclucn on New Years Days. The counsel Tor MT
Hatch asked the Judge charge the jurors that 1t they
found that Brewster Co. paid money 10 the coacnai
OF Mr. Hatch fo- the purpose OF niucncinS him imlr"
ery to make business for the firm without regard or'hr
interest of Mr. Hatch, it frand and Brewster CO.
could not recover for tho work obtained JadGc Al
ker declined so 70 charge the ground that there was
not violence in the that wIud warrant them III NJ
| irving at such a conclusion.
This was the principal point argued on The appeal
Observation-Disclosures tic Judge ought to have kept from
the nry the consideration Of this question Mr. SeTei
who SPOKE In behalf Of Mr.. Hatch. sad That nel lne
plaintiff nor the defendant were unknown to iaine' IL
| hammered one day that Mr.. Hatch having been more
unfortunate IN his busInes; as broker than the plain.
tlrs Rad b.en as carr!age-makrs, suddenly pre-
scented with the extraordinary bill set form III Inc
papers THE most OF its items were Tor repairs 10
landaulet, which had originally cost $1,000 This
lndailct,' NY seNcH COnlcnuttlI Wis AZ NhiV"' oo
the wonderful one-acIsc shay OF the New England
parsou 80 well known. 1t did not, like The shay row
a hundred years II day and then 0f l. sudden give
| out n every part Eat il Two years and then IL
Hoped OUT. ;" and the repairing began Te land uefs
prrrs were ovsrhauled, wlshcrs were pu in, It's
springs ghtencd its front axle was taken out is
,naa loaf was painted again Aoppers ~hatever they
arc) were Oycrauci. and every lew ly6 the ian
,lact kept coming back the mak"Ts TO have some
new repairs. Why WIS i thus! Why did II want new
sprugs one dar and now IIpprr. tac n'xf Way was
the .ndaule repaired December, Ia Maich an darch
aroir IN Inly Il; July again. thr snGaulc In August
the audauei In september. the hndaurI IN November
-tae Isndaulst all the llmc What Was the
cause 1t was because Mr. Ia.ohs coaclman
was IN the pay oi brewster Co, ana whs siniehiLs
MIR Un;rh's rlIrngc thrir Interest In ms ciimouy
jenkins the coAchnan. Ned ina ne received pr
| s.rt every wear from Brcwser & c. Livery NV
Years DIV ne uel TO g, Hud get hts trccnt o money
lie couldn't bow much II was ht never HSki WY
,hS r9snn in his testimony ~ InirLablc H., said
In re gard the repairs custom 'ry q" Tie mt "t
Imes Il is ST. sonciirucr ~ or -. nnd have 'omr-
times gwen moro tian s. 80. aid don't So bat We
| have given more ihaa That. We niwAts Hlvr u. IL
| tucy don't cone, We a"ela sen" H. We s"fe
me OLD country II induces u III IA ia frrl rridr 10
ms carr.nge He has 20 ti"at MS iirnd- ne hur lch
noG:y' ifN credit 10 Us 'i' circuit u "'' '"'''
.Sow :lr scwclI cortn:al. itis not nccr--ary To-
me- 10 argue thai tHr GO 4cIilan Wsa inr SrNah 81"
Sir Hatch. crllr 10 have ma III 100 O., ~ rs
ntrcsi 9" I;r~~tcr & Co., witc, W. n
s nf Mr. II.tci II WIS Il I'd. WY .uir'l The judge
50 cinrcei You may coil lh 81 N'H lr'i =. "ni' Vt
what yoa will. Il Was hriho. We we're roG:ed b' De
Jude OF oar constitutional riGht ~ if.ii IS. ifF
IN urgrr TO mr. duce from tor IN C"nniIW'
the custom OF blibing "Hr nvduis for Inc Az
vantage oi trade men and manufacturer hI" 1iS
on! carriages every two or trc da'S 1" tfkc thrh mo
tHc shnp 81 Brewster &CO expecting IL 10 pay the mn
Wit ou qnotii0u No contract cuniiar' to LAW can De-
c:fcfc 4 n any cont. We al wiiin~ 10 - IL ccd
10 q certain extent TlDr wc are ilaV III ahlu bil
when II comes a. Importing lcse eecnS customs in'"
%" ZONES Ii slses To-" deep IN loiu ,'l ,.,
isn't cOachinRn ia kfwGrik who dprnni lr'i urnn
the fpe man. the hnTn ys-iigkcr ana the riiLgt maker
for hs e~s; that there ISN'T COOK who d,c,f TAX her
COM mi ssiUu Tie baker a1d tnc crOc'T lulccft ~
there il u demon your own kcicn VINO Is ~ rnd.s
YOU this way And impinie tic Cont IN thr
OF honesty aul good morale, To dcclar llr coAlrhct
| ul,dc under such circumstances Is not biialNS''
MIR AriOux in reply sad that he had no! appreciated
the portance Of lie Until lie had heard Mr. S'"-
rIs argument But when hc learned that y liz decision
The demon in every ktcrcn III the city Whs 10 be tNlr
clsrd he began 10 be impressed ana NtSh'h uO"n ny
me burden Of the lie sld that ne Yond nn dc
tend the custOn uaing presents 10 cDaclDCn because
II did not the Court IN tins cause II was SUM
cieut know that II general cus;"in But II "ar
moi shown by the evidence mat the giving OF the pres
ents 10 Dir. Hacns cOachnon had nnythng to 90 VIII
The repairs They all rendered neocsSaiy by ht
ilreatnent OF the vehicles. by bad driving Over bac
roads. The defendant admitted ~ his answer fLt ~,
repairs were neccss Try. IL Brewster Co. properly die
Inc work necessary 10 he dune tnry could recover 81
defendant even II they gave tue whole OF II TO Mt
Hatchs coachrUn. -
s. MIR SeWrll made Teolnder 10 the statement that thu
carriage brOkru and the repnirs were male ntces
| sary by reckless driving. Exactly, ne said " Bu
pieces Why, jenkins, Mr. Hntchs c0achilal, hccdnh
: brewster Co. pfid him to do So He wasn't IN Mr.
Uafcls employ the first year lac had the andAuet. III
received the presents and then hc began 10 break tn
| springs" o
It ROBBlNG II. b: CLAFLIN & co.