The daily gazette., 1882-12-12
COURT DOINGS TO-DAY.
PROCEEDINGS OF INTEREST
BEFORE THE BENCH.
THE CASE OF ARCHITECT THoRNE
Another Jury Hangs Fire and Is Dis
charged-How the Balioting stood while
IL Was Out.

the plans, whether the witness got the con-
tract for building or net he reiterated that
Weldin had said that he had given Mr.. Rice
the measurements of the house, but pre-
ferrcd to have witness do the work Weidin
insisted on Thorne bidding for the carpenter
| work witness offered TO do 1t for 5000, but
| his offer was never noticed bid was made
on Mce's plans; it took almost two weeks
solid time to make plans and specifications.
| D. III. Thorne, sworn-Was foreman for
my brother, Edwin w. Thorne, in 1879 ;
was present when Weldin and brother were
discussing plans for a house there were
two consultations about the drawings
Weldin said that he and his family were
pleased with the plans of witness brother.
| Chauncey G. Graham, sworn-Am an
architect as far as can see from the draw
ings lshown witness the work of the draw
ings, according to usual rates, would be
worth about per cent. on the estimated
cost OF the building they are known as
preliminary drawings, sizes OF glass; etc,
not being given estimates could be made
from drawings as shown for what is pre-
sented here per cent. could be charged,
and 4 per cent. more for specifications l
would charge u per cent, "a charge usually
and properly made.
On cross -examination-Wouldn not present
such plans for bids to be made upon; would
| give more finished piece of work for an
Elevation the work is good SO far as it goes,
but is evidently crude would take long
time to make a copy of the elevation |;
would take three or four days to make other
drawings, according to circumstances !;
would take a day and half to get up ele-
Vation "a per cent. is the regular rate for
| best architects.
| William R. Farrell, sworn--Am an archi-
| tect; the only things missing on the draw
| a ha tp1
from plans shown, which are not prelimi-
nary; "a per cent. is charged for finished
plans with duplicate, and per cent.
where contract is not given to maker OF
plans; drawings are perfect except figures;
they are not exactly fiHished az first-class
drawings; they are worth 9 per cent; a
building could be constructed from them.
Mr.. Lore cross-examined witness closely as
to the quality ofthe drawings and where he
had been employed as an architect; all that
was needed to fully perfect the drawings
were the figures.
Considerable amusement was created by
the witness, who came originally from
| Dublin, In giving ready and pithy answers
to what he thought were irrelevant ques-
tions.
| At 4.30 Mr.. Lore stated the defendants
side of the question. Mr.. Thorne, he stated,
was newcomer in Wilmington and had
gone to Mr.. Weldin to get credit for some
| lumber. MIR. Weldin had not expected to
pay MIR. Thorne for drawing the plans, and
the latter had distinctly offered to do the
drawing free of cost, as it "could be done
at odd times" The building was done
from drawings of E. L. Rice, and Thorne,
not getting the contract, became angry and
brought the suit.
c. w. Weldin, affirmed-Detailed Thorne's 6
first visit to him on business, and then had
talked over proposed plan to build house
| at Eighth and Broome streets; witness
plans were crude, and Thorne said he would
like to get up plans witness said he had
| agreed TO take Paneoast Aliens note to
| Ihorne, due in nine months, and also made
| an abatement on Thorne's bill of Si9.13 in
consideration of which plaintiff was to make
the drawings and specifications the note
was for $3.50; Thorne said nothing,
in any interview, about charging
for his plans plaintiff said being a
new man in business In Wilmington he
would be glad to make plans and If possible
get the contract; plaintiff also said draw
ings would not cost anything as he would
only use leisure time on plans Thorne had
an open account with witness, and the
former said latter having done him favor
he would like to return it; expressed the
fact that drawings pleased him; told Thorne
that Rice was TO be the architect, and plain
tiff objected had another talk with plaintiff
about drawings Thorne took away witness
rough plans, but he never returned them
no contract was made that the plans should
be paid for.
Plans from which the defendants house
was built were presented, identified as being
made by 4. L. Rice, and offered in evidence.
Examination continued--At the opening
Of the bids all the bidders were present ex-
cept Mr.. Thorne; the latter's bid was
rejected because Of the provision to build in
the winter.
A nu1b of bids for the building OF
Weldin's house, by different contractors,
were presented and offered in evidence.
After considerable legal discussion be-
| tween the opposing counsel the examina-
tion was continued, and the witness stated
that he did not promise or offer to pay
Thorne for his drawings, even if the con-
tract was not~given him the first thing
witness knew that Thorne wanted to be
paid was when the latter wrote letter, soon
after the contracts were given, asking and
| demanding compensation.
At the request of the jury they were dis
missed at $40 to allow them to catch trains
for home.
AJURY HANGS FIRE.
just prior to the adjournment of court
the jury in the McCarty- Lockwood case
were brought into court and announced
| Lnelr total lnaDillty 10 agree. Jhey were
therefore dismissed.
1t is understood that when discharged
they stood to 4 In favor of the plaintiff
On one OF the ballots, of which were taken
the vote stood to 5 for the plaintiff
THIS MORNINGS COURT PROCEEDINGS.
John Biggs, ESQ, read an affidavit from
j. j. Lockwood, defendantin the case of the
promissory note, asking that Charles E.
McCarty, being nonresident, be COM
PEELED to give security in the sum of 5000
to secure the costs of the case, or else suffer
non-sut. Mr.. Lore, plaintiffs counsel,
expie sed himself as being willing to
furnish the required security.
The case OF the Wilmington and KenneEt
Turnpike Company VS.. the Mutual Union
Telegraph Company was continued by
mutual consent
The Thorne- Weldin case was then resumed
and the direct examination of Mr.. Weldin
was resumed and continued, the witness
denying nearly all the statements made by
Mr.. Thorne.
On being cross examined by Mr.. Nields
the witness stated that his conversation with
Thorne began in an interview about the pur-
chase OF some lumber by plaintiff.
Continued In second edition.
-s$a-u~~S--
/ New Time TabIe.