Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1885-05-28

The case of Martha @. stlmmell VS..
Samuel Brown was resumed at the opening
Of court Friday, and Washington Cox
was called to the stand by the plaintiff. He
testified that in his opinion the condition In
which Brown left Mrs. Stimmell's property
by grading down his lot deprecated it to
the extent of $500 or 5000.
John =. Ruth, real estate agent, said the
selling value Of the property was llepre-
ciated 1900 to $500, and the rental value
s75 to 200 per year.
Alban ]. Pyle said the property was de-
preciated in value 5000 or $500. MIR. Pyle
also said he would not have built wall to
hold Mrs. Stimmell's bank up for less than
4175 or 1900.
testified that, in his opinion ms an expert,
Mrs. Stimmel's property was damaged $500
by Browns excavations.
Eleazer Ainsworth, who owns property in
the neighborhood, also said he thought
Mrs. St,mmell's property was damaged to
the extent of $500 or 5000.
Jacob Snyder, a milk dealer, said that
after the alley caved In he fell there one
morning and spilled his milk.
"Dld you cry over it?' inquired Mr..
Gray.
mo, sir, never cry over split milk" re-
turned the witness.
John Wall n carter, testified that when he
nONbu uSneSt Ill 1909, tlb HHu W lthe sum-
mell's ashes through the house on account
| of the condition of the alley.
The plaintiff here rested, after which the
| Jury not empaneled in this case was dis
| charged until Monday, as the argument of
the b. Il o. Telegraph Company against the
telephone company will occupy all of to-
mOrrOws session.
Mr.. Gray asked that the jury he allowed
| to visit the premises of Mrs. Stimmell and
| Mr.. Brown, and as Mr.. Nields had no
objection, the Court consented, and the jury
| made the visit during tho noon recess under
| the charge of Baililf Rainey,
| At 1888 o'clock court adjourned until
| O'Clock In the afternoon.
In the case of Mrs Stimmell VS.. SamueI
| Brown, at the session of superior court
| in the afternoon, James O. Van
Trump, plumber, testified that the iron
| drain he hid under Mrs. Stinmell's
house cost $57.0S The pipe took the
drainage that previously went down the
alley.
The plaintiff here closed.
After n brief consultation with his
client Mr.. Gray opened for the defense
with n brief statement TO the effect that
in grading down his lot Mr.. Brown did
only what he had II right to do, despite
the dninuge TINT ensued TO Mrs. Slim.
mclls property. Mr.. Brown was called
to the stand and said that when he dug
his lot down to grade he understood tha
he was doing right MS long ms he kept OF
his own line, which he did.
Nathaniel b. Culbert testified that ht
Ind considerable experience in building
and that in his opinion Mrs. Stiminelri
property was damaged to the extent o
the cost of wall along the alley and nj
more.
IllDohn II. Haddock said it was customary
when grading lot down to the proper
levi and I'M ungraded lot adjoins, for thu
owner f tie high lot to keep up his soil
He gave several instances in his persona
experience where this was done.
Joseph l.. Carpenter, Jr., Patrick Dill
lon, John Mines, N. b. Culbert ant
Sheriff Ford testified, us practical an,
experienced builders, that il was tn
universal custom in this city for owner
of high lots TO protect their soil whei
adjoining lots were cut down to grade.
William L. Straughn testified that Brow
asked him to call ON Mr.. Stimmel AM
learn the extent of the damage, with
view of assuming portion of it, but Mr.
Stimmell declined any measures OF com
promise, as the affair had gone 80 fin
and he would s'teach Brown n lesson"
Joseph l.. Carpenter, Jr., said, in hi
opinion, Mrs. Stimmell's property wa
not damaged my more than the cost q
putting up wall and fence. Mr.. Dillo
gave similar testimony.
At 5.55 o'clock court adjourned unit
, 10 o'clock Saturday morning.