The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1881-11-03
Supreme Judicial Court.
JUSTICE sYMoNDs PRESIDING.

| JUSTICE SfMONDS PRESIDING.
The case of Mary II. Castle, of Cleveland, Ohio,
VS.. Inc Belfast Foundry Company, which began on
| wednesday afternoon of last week, occupied the
| attention of the Court until SATURDAY. afternoon.
when 1t went to the jury. 1t is the most important
action tried this term and one of great local interest
The court room was crowded throughout the whole
trial. The action was to recover 81 200 on prom
issory note given to Mary II. Castle by her son w.
W. Castle president and treasurer of the Belfast
Foundry company. This is one Of several cases
wherein the same principals figure. To ensure Il
correct understanding of the case a brief history is
necessary.
A short time previous Go 1873, w. W. Castle, by
the purchase of stock, became the principal owner
| in the foundry company, its president, treasurer,
and general manager In the great fire in this city
in August, 1875 the foundry building with its con-
| tents were destroyed. All that was left of the
| former valuable property was the land upon which
| the building stood. Mr.. Castle then removed to
| the Head of the Tide where he fitted up the Old
| Wilder foundry and carried the business until
1876, when the present structure Front street
| erected. During the period from 1873 to 1878 the
| foundry company had q normal existence, but it is
| alleged that Castle ran the business in his own
name. The allegation has never been proved The
directors were elected annually, but from 1873 to
1873 this board did not choose president or treas
urer. So when the note in suit was given it is
claimed that Castle was not the legal president He
not only did the business alone, but his deposits of
money in the Belfast National bank were in his own
name, ana from this general fund he drew checks
| for his business and private purposes. The money
| he alleges to have received from his mother was
also deposited to his private account In the fall
of 1876 the new building was erected. In 1873 the
capital stock of the concern was increased to SO
600. Axe Hayford and VIM. II. Hall became inter
ested and the company was reorganized
| The defendants claim that Castle was not prcsi-
| dent of the company when the note was alleged to
have been given, and that if he borrowed money ut
| all from the plaintiff who is his mother he borrow
ed it IN his individual capacity and the company is
not liable. That Castle was running the foundry as
| his own enterprise md not as the Belfast Foundry
| Company. To substanate this view the defence
introduced testimony which went to show that in
January, ISIS, after the present foundry building
| had been completed and furnished with engine,
boiler machinery, tools, Sc, Castle sold the entire
| property to the Belfast Foundry company, rectiv-
ing in payment certificates of stock to the amount
of $4,000. This stock Castle assigned to AXel Hay
| ford and William II. Hall rs security for $4,000
| which sum these gentlemen paid to relieve Castle
of his liabilities in erecting and furnishing thencw
building. OF this sum paid $4,000 were for notes
outstanding and - 200 in cash. Castle at the same
time gave Messrs. Hayforl and Ilal a detailed
schedule Of all the other liabilities against the prop
erty, which amounted to 81 800 and which he, Cas-
tie agreed take care of out of the s. 600 cash re
ceived. The transfer and sale We're duly recorded
by the clerk, Mr.. 4. V. Parker, in the directors
record book \ copy of the transfer was made at
Mr.. Hayfortls request, which copy was produced
in court but the directors book produced did NOT
contain copy of the salc. The defence charged
some person with mutilatng the book in removing
this copy. There Is blank in the book covering
a period of fifteen months The clerk testified to
| having recorded the sale. Since MessrS Haytor1
and Hall have hat control Of the foundry company
bills to the amount Of $4,000, not included in Castles
schedule, have been brought against the company
On the other hand the plaintiff anrms that she
loaned the amount to the defendant company, that
She holds note Signed by the legal officer that the
money was expended for the benefit of the company
and that the defendants are liable Cheeks to the
amount of 81 061, which went to pay for the boiler
and machinery were produced, ami it is asserted
that the balance went to pay for labor freight an
machinery, coal, &C.-all for the Uses Of the conf
pany. That the subsequent actions were false issues
and had nothing to 10 with the main question
Castle was the only witness put on the stand for
the paintih. He underwent a most rigid cross eN-
animation, and in the witness box two dav~.
In his cross examination he admitted that all the
books papers letters, bills and vouchers belonging
to the company previous to ISIS were burned by
Him. The counsel for the defence claimed that the
articles destroyed would have been valuable testi-
mony for his side. The case was ably managed ON
both sides and all that was possible was brought
out.
The jury retired at o'clock in the afternoon, and
IN the evening word to the court lhat they were
unable to agree. The Judge instructed the jury to
remain until midnight, tnc 1T that timcif they were
unable to agree they might come out. The Jury Dis
agreed. It IS said the jury was eleven IT, one in
favor of the pin. ". II. Fogler for pin. A. T.
Gould for tleft.
The court began on the criminal docket saturday
afternoon ON the of State ON complaint Of \.
Il. Turner V. Palmer VI. Turner, +. f. Gregory,
and Chas. NJ. Bullard, AL of Palermo. \ case of
riot in removing Turner's effects from a building.
Defence that Turner hai no tenancy, and that it
was not riot Verdict, not guilty. County Attor
ncy Wallace for State knowIton and Fogler for
defts.
Monday morning. State complaint of James
Mutt vs.. +. f. Hanson. \ case OF libel. Ham
son belongs in Searspor and is Il minister in
the denomination known as the Church of t1od,
while Mutt claims to be an ordained preacher In the
Advent Christian Church. Last spring Mutt hl,l
Hanson arrested and brought before the municipal
court for certain alleged libcllous utterancr~ 1t
appeared from testimony that Hanson wrote a no
tiCe which was posted at the Porter school house in
Searsport saying that he would tell the people who
Mutt was. After prayers Hanson read letter, from
Dexter Bangor and other places, which made Mutt
out to BE- 4 very Bad nut. The letters accused Mutt
of buying eggs on false pretcnces, selling stockings
for an old lady and keeping the proceeds, and OF
drunkenness at Bangor where he was known a,
drunken Jim Mutt The defence was iu-titica-
tion, truth. Testimony WAS introduced TO prove to
the jury that the charges We're sustained AMI they
gave Il verdict Of ''no guilty for the defendant.
County Attorney Wallace for the State. Thompson
4 Dunton for defendant.
State on complaint OF Geo. w. Mesourc vs. Thomas
b. Sever Parties live in searsport. \ case of As
sault with intent to kill. Defendant Is an infrm
man % years of age, a pauper Of the town. Me-
sure and another We're hired by the town tn nurse
Sever. Sever had some trouble With Mcssurc and
said he would Elk him" Sever Kept areyolver at
the head of his bed. On the Fourth of July.lu
Measure accompanied some boys past sewers house
when the latter came to the door, pointed 4 reyoI-
yer at Measure and snapped the pistol twice. The
defence was that Sever WAS annoyed by 4 lot Of
boys, headed by Messurc, who sail they were going
to celebrate and raise h--l with Old sever That
he pointed his hand at the boys To intimiate them
Verdict not guilty. County Attorney Wallace for
State Wayland knowlton for Ieft.
On Tuesdaya civil case was tried-George Near,
of Belmont vs.. Gorham Heal, Of ~carsmont Action
to repIcvin horse. The parties traded horses.
The plaintiff saws delft warranted horse sound and
the animal not proving repevined the animal
Defence says horse was sound with the exception
of difficulty which was known to pin. Verdict for
1eft. Greer and Fogler for PIN. Thompson 4
Dunton for deft
Robert q. Foy Of Freedom, indicted in January
for larceny, pleaded guilty and was fined $40.
.tnli, NM No.. l..