Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1884-03-25

They saoR.d that he had trad q for piece
Of land In Byfon, though h.sas never deed.
Ell 10 him-ani cisipsi that this fact
broke III. settlement In Mexico. CLARK
Has,on testified that Charles never had
home NJ his house though he was onsn
there 10 see bis sister. The question was
a. Intricate one, hui was handled
With great sk,n on both sides. and was
uied on IL legal merits, strictly within
legal rules OF evidence. Mr.. Foster
opened Cor he plaintiffs. and Mr. Swasey
closed Coz them Mr.. Bisbee opened and
closed Coz he defendants Jaige Nirgin
gave vcry clear chugs which wss per
fcctly satisfactory d both pUties. The
jury "a. out a short time ani returned
a vertic, for TIE plalaud.. rhas DlSaeli
Is called upon 70 bear ths expenses OF the
sult. 10 pay the lewiston BIN, tho Mexico
bin, AMI take charge % the unfortunate
nan Who IL row completely paralyIed be-
low The hips
s,i Ambrose & -osaE Aim'fvs nathan
fauum.
uutchins
Foster Heuick Wright
-sascy Has ms
Insolvency. - F.rnam. risisur di.oontin
uss a. o. Fsrnum
Ambrose e. Scgar administrator of
the estate OF John . Segar late OF Run
fort. brings this ac;ion 20 recover ihc
amount % note Cor So 40 given ~ \.
Fsruam principal. aRi NJ. y Lafkn'
surety % ne deceasei. March 6. ls,o
The note Vas payable 90 demand. with
Interest A primA facic case was made
out hy presenting The note. with admls.
slon OF signature Defense. partial pay
meat Fafnam who has gone Into lusol'
veucy testlnei that Jane ~. isss. he bal
paid deceased SIS In moaey which hal
not been endorsed on the note The sau
OF sgf.ss va endorsed on note by This Al
mlulstraiof when he settled store accouu'
Of deceased with firnam funun hal
done large general ant commission
business in couatry proiacc az Ramfori
snd shipped a large quantity Of butter lot
deceased. he claims % have paid de-
ceased sssS A. the time a oer,aln hut'e'
Transaction was settled that The deceased
agreed 90 endorse amount on note. AM
also credit him for payment on sccosut OF
butter. Defendant lntrodacss hls books
% prove BY chsrgcs ant credits therein. th'
corrrctncs. % hls claims Verdict foi
e., ~. being amount admitted by defend
ant o. b. doe.
iu Harriet p rhomas " Inhabitants o
| rcru
Nltcheifa Atsori Nv holster
suasey. rcsfer A usrfirk
n savAgo
Thls Acilon wAs pat on trial FRIDAY A.
iernoon. and vas 10 recover damages a.
legged o. have bcen received By plalnur BY
reason ~ detective bridge near worthlsy
Pond Ia Peru. on The ggih Of August, iss2
W. make no report % the case, A. 10 d
st.u on trial
Ca Auna Soys,v. samuel O. Crorseii AM
/ leila 7 Crockett
Foster A iierrick liasilnrAWnfon
iior, himnail
Tbs acilou wAs referred b Judge Bar
rows. aui thc following report was mai,
a. ms term
/ The plaintiffs ciAim l. 30 recover al %
part % money value ola boui aud check
Which was turned over ~ her o. George
A. Wilson The attorney % ths dcfcniAuts
January ca. ISL. d settle a salt which
aai bssn commenced against her % o.
cover damages for rcputci nhsis perpctrat
80 - her iu which the female defended
here p,Alutr To- said suit Was charge
slth then and want % chastity. But "a,
plAlutIf fsil. b satisfy me that she mais
that settlement through darcss or ffaai
OF any wTOugfui practice on The part o
these defendants, 90 any one actng on
their bshAif. or that she herself wAs not Al
that tine fully competAnt ~ make valid
al bindlug contract or that auy uulAii
advantage Ma tAken By The dsfcniants of
their attorneys % her unic- The CIfcum
stances. GA The coutrAry Dat thai sae
made the contract OF settlement under
stauaingly and % her own voltion sftsi
being advised ~ these defendants attor.
uey - SEEK legal counsel lu The matter, an
that no unfair advantage wAs taken ~ bet
I sliusiion 30 compel % Induce hasiy and
l disadV kntagcous settlement
\ IN fact there i % testimony In this cas-
which In my Judgement tend. with suy
| force 10 sustain the plaintiffs contention
except the single conceded fact that The
sun demanded AMI received A. damage.
va large. larger than I sh0ald have al
slsed clients undsr al The circumstances
| 10 demand. larger than I shogd have "a.
l pectei the defendant in that sat D. bs
willing 10 pay.
Hence dgrlng the progress Aui a. .l,
| close OF the hearing before me. | suggest
"a that perhaps The parties might dnd
| themselves willing % compromise
upon terms Which I might not be- shie
properly % make In my decision % The
case. Bat they claimed their legal right.
and decision. TAking into account tle
/ fact above referred %. | am silll satisfied
that the demand WAS honestly made BY the
defendants and their attorneys aud fairly
Accedcd 10 BY plAlntlf
am Of op.nion that the remark % the
court Ia Doyle W. Donueily IS Ne. ~ Is
applicable.
"whils the controversy Is fresh, the
parties themselves knOw more completely
than any one else can what justice requires
AZ their hands. sud their Agreements made
In goOi faith for the avoidance % htiga-
tlon aud expense should nnt favor 10 the
courts
Upon the view which take OF The tes-
tlnouy presented Ia this case. | nni M
ground upon which the plaintiff can prop
erly claim % rescind either Ia whole or Ia
part the contract OF settlement which she
made. or % recover any part % The sun
paid in Pursuance thereof | therefore
report that the Defendants never promised
and that Judgment ought 10 be rendered
Tor the defendants And for their costs OF
reference taxed a. s25 SO, aud costs %
court 20 be taxed BY tue court.
WN q. BARgOws, Ref
NR. wADsNoEru SAYS.
Atthc september term Of tn supreme judi.
ciAi Coart the Grand Jury reversed the ola
aaAge % "ags before beauty aud selected u-
A. boss OF that dixnihcd body. Nov the mem