Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1886-12-30
THE snUroE CASES.
OnTriRl Before Referees
Of tine EsIaintiKfs All hm,

OnTrtRl Before characterization
| Of the EIaintsFfs All Ina,
| Before Referees Phillip Plunkett, Isaac
Q. Pyle and Benjamin Elliott, In the law,
library at the courthouse, Tuesday morn.
ing, were heard, the cases Of James MoIntire,
William MoGarr and Robert TorrenB vs..
the City of Wilmington. The city, in
October 1884, constructed sluice In the
Delaware river bank at the foot Of q
street, William II. Crooks being the con-
tractor.
Before the work was finished a heavy
storm arose, producing an unusually
heavy tide which broke the river bank
and flooded the lands of the plaintiffs,
causing them, as they alleged, consider.
able damage. Hence the suits. j. FL.
Hoffecker, Jr., ED, represented the
PLAINTIFF and City Solicitor Turner the
defendant.
The plaintiffs were successfully called
and testified to the loss they sustained by
damage to crops and deprivation Of the
use of the flooded land for pas.uraQe
| purposes during the continuance Of the
food. Mr. McIntire detailed his loss at
$721.40; Mr.. McGarr placed his at
$333. 25, and Mr.. Torrens said he lost, ia
milk and pasturage principally, the sum
of $345.
The plaintiffs next called as their heavy
witness City Councilman James McKenna
| Of the First ward. Mr.. McKenna said
that in the fall of 1884, while chairman of
the law committee of City Council, he
visited the sluice at the foot of G street,
the plaintiffs at that time having entered
suits for damages. In pursuance of these
visits the law committee prepared two re-
ports TO City Council. The minority report,
which Mr.. McKenna prepared and signed
and copy of which he drew from his
pocket and handed to plaintiffs counsel,
declared that the sluice was outside of
the city limits and that Council had no
right to engage to construct or repair il
that there never existed contract for o
previous Council to keep the said sluice
in repair, that the chairman of the sewer
committee was aware of this fact after the
work of constructing the said sewer was
under way; and TINT the work OF con-
struction was conducted improperly. He
also said he believed Council had no right
to undertake the work. The report fur.
ther stated that the contractor, William
III. Crooks, was only nominal con-
tractor" and that it was q subject of
general conversation" over Third street
bridge that Martin Farrell, chairman of
the sewer committee at the time, was the
rea, contractor.
Mr.. McKenna squirmed desperately
under City Solicitor Turner's cross-exam.
nation. Mr.. Turner: insisted that he
name some Of the people who thus talked
about the contract. but he could mot give
q single name. Referee Plunkett kindly
came to his rescue by saying
the referees had nothing TO do
with this matter, as they only desired to
know whether the sewer was constructed
in a negligent manner or not. Mr..
McKenna said he talked with McIntire
and McGarr about their loss, but did not
advise them to sue the city. But when he
made out his minority report he believed
that they were entitled to damages. He
admitted that the sewer committee
had reported adversely against the
construction of the sluioe and that
the City Council insisted upon its
construction. He also admitted that the
sewer committee had presented PROPOSE
ton from Henhoetfer & Vaughn, respon-,
sible contractors, to build the sluice, and
that the City Council, instigated By hl,
(McKenna's) objections, rejected thu
proposition and insisted upon
the committee advertising for pr
posals. In consequence of this 'tio-
the contract was awarded to Crooka, VIII
was the lowest bidder. He wouil n
say, however, that the members OF tie
sewer committee were entirely guiltless IL
the matter. In conclusion he reluctantly
admitted that there was nothing more
than mere rumor to warrant the assump-
ton that Mr.. Farrell was interested in
Mr.. Crooks contract.
At 1.40 o'clock the plaintiffs rested and
City Solicitor Turner began calling the
witnesses for the defence.
Martin Farrell, who was chairman of
the sewer committee when the sluice at
the foot of G street was constructed, tes-
titled that council awarded the contract
to William II. Crook, who was the lowest
bidder. During the progress of the work
heavy tides set IN, washed away the bank
and caused the flood. The contractor
used due diligence in his operations and
did all III his power to avert the disaster.
II. w. Christy, who helped Crooks to
repair the damage, said he believed the
work was we'll done, and that he used due
diligence. He believed that SO out of
every hundred men would have conducted
George w. Mckee saw the ground after
the flood, and did not think the corn was
damaged much except in the shocks that
saw he considered the crop only an ordin.
airy one. He did not place high esti-
mate on the ground for grazing purposes,
and said it would not do for pasturing
sheep. In his opinion the corn crop
hax- l,nI
the owner gone to work at once to save IT,
Crooks bought tirst-class timber for the
work, from the firm by which witness
was employed. He and Mr.. Cbristy
walked over good part of the corn field
that had been flooded.
Mr.. Christy was recalled, and said he
would have readily taken the corn in the
field after the break and overflow for the
1926. Crooks owed him for services in
repairing the break.
Joseph b. Lefevre was called, and said
he saw Mr.. McIntire's damaged corn after
the flood. 1t was then in the crib and
was sprouting freely. he went to buy the
corn, but after seeing its condition he
would have nothing to do with it.
Councilman George Adele said Lefevre
had told him it was an outrage for
McIntire and the bther two plaintiffs to
ask the city large damages.
Mr.. Letevre was again called, and snid
that the remark he really made to Adele
was That it was an outrage for the city TO
come over the line and cut through the
banks in New Castle county.
At 40 O'Clock the case was adjourned
until 1890 O'Clock yesterday morning.
The case was continued yesterday. The
arguments of counsel, j. Il. Hoffecker,
Jr., Esq, for the plaintiffs, and City So
licitor Turner for the city, were con-
cluded at noon. Messrs. Plunkett, Pyle
and Elliott, the referees, held the case
under confederation and adjourned for |