Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1885-10-24
A Great Tea-Kettle Case.
New Haven Conn Register.

Il treat Ica-hetkle Saees
New Haven Conn Register.
about fifteen years ago." said an at
torney we'll acquainted with the fact thi
morning, "a New Havan gentleman 90
ing to picnic with his family bought /.
tea.kettle for which he paid Is cents
After they returned from the picnic thu
wife of the man who bought the kettle
told neighbours wife she might have it
She took it. A year Passed around ane
the picnic season returned. The same
family planned another expedition, and
the head fthe family called for his 2s
cent kettle. His wife went to the neigh
Dor after it. The other lady refused to
give it up. She had become attached to
that tea-kettle and claimed it az hel
property. Hot words ensued, and both
women got their backs up so to speak
Their husbands took up the quarrel, and
bitter words passed between them. The
man who originally purchased the
tea-kettle applied to Judge Munson fol-
advice and assistance in recovering his
property. The lawyer advised the man
that it was not worthy contending for,
that he had better let it 90 and pocket
his loss; but that advice did not suit.
The kettle was his, aid he would have
it. Attorney Munson suggested that q
letter would be sufficient. The client
left fee for the letter, and one was sent
to the holder of the tea-kettle. The de-
linquent consulted Attorney Wood. He
advised the client to give up the disputed
kettle. That advice was utterly thrown
away. Both parties persisted in follow
ing up the attitude they had placed them
selves in, and finally Attorney Munson
brought replevin suit in which the
value of the tea-kettle was alleged to be
Is cents, and a bond of double the
amount was given, as required by the
statute. The suit was placed in the
hands of Sheriff Stevens to serve the
papers, with instructions to serve be-
tween 5 and 6 o'clock, when the I'M
offending tea-kettle would probably be
simmering away on the stove. The
Sheriff went as he was directed, found
the kettle on the stove filled with hot
water, emptied it and carried it off.
When husband No. returned home he
was put in terrible rage to learn what
had been done. He and his wife made
directly for Attorney Woods Office.
They wanted to fight for the possession
of that tea-kettle as they had the least
show. Attorney Wood was literally
feed and induced to take up the case,
which was returnable before Justice
Sylvanus Butler. Under the rule a con-
tinuance of q week wac granted. On the
day set for the trial the parties were
present with their witnesses ready for
trial. Lawyer Wood made motion for
an increase of bonds, alleging that the
kettle was worth so cents and the bond
was not full statuary bond. This point
was argued at length, and Justice Butler
At this time the parties ap-
peared for trial. Attorney Wood moved
to file an offset for the value of the hot
water which the sheriff had emptied
out of the kettle and the disappointn ent
his clients had suffered in consequence
of not having their usual cup of tea for
supper. This Attorney Wood claimed,
far exceeded the amount of the value of
the tea kettle, and he wanted to recover
81 from the plaintiff Attorney Munson
then informed the court that that was
matter between his brother Wood's)
clients and Sheriff Stevens. The Court
took that view of the case and refused
the application, but ordered an increase
of bond to double the amount. The case
was then continued, owing to the lateness
Of the hour, for one week on its merits.
The case was tried and decision reserved
for week. Judgement was rendered
for the plaintiff to recover 81 damage
and costs, between $14 and SIS in all.
Attorney Wood gave notice of appeal.
but the appeal papers was never taken
out. The case was argued in one form or
another for several weeks. The picnic
season was over when it was finally con-
Guided. The litigation cost the parties
probably $50 or $40 apiece, and when
they got through they were not satisfied.