The Portland daily press., 1885-10-10
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT
nEroRE COLT AND wEnn, IL.

FRIDAY-Charles w. Goddard ct ais, executors
of r. o. j. Smith, in equity, VS.. the Western
Union Telegraph Company
ls b wa 6s G ae e sth TO eo N me-
telegraph company to account to him for large
sums OF money.
taken upon the bill and answer, Mr.. Smith died In
October, 1875. and Judges Goddard and Water
EXECUTORS anr the spe Of e s
Mr.. Smiths death large number of writs were
pending in the different courts wherein he was in
terested as plaintiff or defendant. In process of
time all those cases have been disposed Of except
the present. For several years negotiations were
in progress for the settlement of the telegraph
suit also, but an agreement has now been reached
by the executors and Bradbury & Bradbury, the
e0eetoTs concuded to Bring bs case eSi to close
by moving for leave to file bill of reviyor, cere-
gony still REQUIRED in equity cases in the United
with in the courts of Maine by an act of the legis
lature. The bill was accordingly flied in April
last, and July the companys new attorney Hon.
Orville ID. Baker of Augusta, filed his pleas. al
leging taches or negligence on the executors part
alsc pleadinglthe statute of limitations because
more Ihah SIN years had elapsed since the exec
half Of the executors filed motion to strike out
Mr.. Bakers pleas because they were not season
ably filed according TO Rule So Of the Y. Sc
court, which requires cause TO be shown why bills
of revivor should not be filed at the next rule day
after the expiration of IA days from service of the
subpoena on the respondent, which Judge God
dard claimed to have been the June rules, June L,
1885, so that Mr.. Baker was SO days too late and
guilty ef ldcites himself.
The case was heard on Thursday afternoon be-
fore Judge Ot, Circuit Judge, Judge Webb not
sitting because he had been named in the bill as
an executor, although he never qualified.
Mr.. Baker claimed that there was no rule day
in June, because neither of the judges were pre-
sent.
That compliments had waived their objection,
Il there was any, by not filing. their motion to
strike out his pleas at the time when he filed them,
July Z, and that by agreement with Hon. Bon
Bradbury Judge Goddard consented that the
question might be argued at the July rules instead
on Friday morning Judge Colt announced his
decisions.
Court was imperative aud peremptory in its re- |
quirementS.
2. That the presence of the clerk and not of |
elmer OF Ine Judges was unnecessary for the hold
ing of a rule day
2: That the showing Of cause" required by the
rule was the filing Of pleas and not oral or written
arguments or suggestions of counsel.
4. That the executors had not waived any /
rights by not filing their motion to strike out re- /
sp0ndents pleas on the same day that they were /
filed, viz, July z, and that executors motion was
seasonably filed 10 days afterward, July IL
s. That the alleged agreement could not avail
the respondent company because it did not appear
and indeed was not alleged by. their attorney in
his brief to apply to the filing Of his pleas but was
confined to the arguments only.
That The pleas Of the respondent company hav
ing been filed, as appsars OF record SO days. too
late, must be stricken out, and the motion of the
executors granted.
Therefore decreed, that the motion of COM
plainants be granted, respondents pleas stricken |
out and complainants have leave to file their bill
G. ". Goddard. Orville D. Baker.
BEFORE COLT, j.
Edwin 2. Treat, in error vs. United States
The plaintiff was convicted at the last February
term OF the District Court on nine counts of de-
manaIng ana receiving excessive pension fees and
was sentenced to Imprisonment at hard labor in |
Bangor jail for term of seven months and TO pay
the Circuit Court was allowed, and his recOpniz- |
ance taaen TO appear before this court. Judge