Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1886-05-27


Paris Mitchell said he was in Piersoni
] establishment two days before the fire an6
noticed the quantity Of stock on hand. II
: his judgment the value of the stock at thai
} time WINS between $4,000 and S12 900.
William II. Foulk also saw Mr. Pier
, sons stock just prior 10 the fire. He had
ut the time contract with Mr.. Pieisor
for mill-work for ID houses, amounting tc
} "a, 900, and had not received more thar
oue-twentieth of it previous TO the fire.
He did not know that the balance was in
, the building, but whatever he ordered was
! always sent promptly.
Peter j. Ford, who hauled away the
damaged stock from the burned building,
said he was engaged for over week In
the task and took away about 200 loads.
He received $50 for the stuff.
N. Dubois Sutton said he hauled six
furniture car loads of stuff from Persons
place to the Hunsberger building ihe day
before the fire. There was a full stock
of stuff in Persons at the time. Daniel
H. Sutton oorrobornted this testimony.
Michael Matthews who was driver
for W. II. Pierson during 1882 laid he
hauled some stuff to the Hunsberger build
ing the day before the fire, but did not
know how many loads Being asked if
he had not previously stated in Mr.
Nield's office that he had hauled three
loads he said he did not remember, as he
was drunk that day. He further said,
pointing to Mr.. Stockley of Philadelphia,
"a representative of the insurance company,
who sat by Messrs. Bird and Bradford, that
that man was with him when he got
drunk, and gave him money to treat 'the
crowd, saying, "Tll loan this to you, but
i expect to get il back" StoclIley also
took him to an upstairs room or office
and talked about the case.
On croRs-examination he said that Mr..
Stockley had not offered him money to
testify to anything about the case that
was not true. ~ met him on Second
street, " he said, land that's all remem-
ber." To Mr.. Nields he said that Stockley
offered him a situation in Pennsylvania
if he would go there and accept it. There
was something said to him during his de-
bauch abouts signing paper, but he didnot
remember what it was, as he was too full.
He continued on this debauch for nine
days, during which time he met Stockley
on two or three occasions and had drinks
with him. The places they visited were
saloon on Second street between Market
| anu Mug hllu hfb. pllhuub On SECOND
street near Adams.
Levi Mcdaniel said he saw the fire
when it first broke out and that il was in
the back part of the frame building on
| the corner of Front aud Washington
streets, adjoining Mr.. Persons building.
| There was no fire in Persons place when
his attention was first attracted to the
burning frame building.
| ,IOgenb Elbnrt QOlnra1 in clarna NJ
the club stables ON Washington street be-
low Third, was at the stable when he saw
the fire at Front and Washington streets.
He ran down and saw q light blazing up
between the frame building and Mr.. Pier
| sons, but did not know which building
was burning. james Till, cololed who
was also Mt the stable and went down to
the fire, said that when he got there the
frame building was burning, near the
chimney at the back part. The Pierson
building was not then on fire.
John Pierson saw the fire soon after il
broke out II was then confined to the
frame building; he went into the Pierson
building, but there was no fire there
Ten minutes later the fire communicated
to the Pierson building and rushed
through it.
At $40 o'clock court adiournadsuntil
10 O'clock Tuesday morning.
In the case of William II. ri, rson vs.
Etna Insurance Company in superior
court, Tuesday morning, the plant fl called
Charles p. Brinton, Ezra @. Imkans and
Afford Pierson, who testified Il at they
saw the fire in its earliest stages md that
it was then in the frame binding at
Front and Washington streets, subse-
quently communicating with Persons
sash mandatory. N. Dubois Sutton
said he took Mr.. Persons horse out of
the stable after the fire broke out, and at
that time the fire had not communicated
to the factory.
William II. Pierson, the plaintiff, said
he had an insurance of $4,000 on his
| stock. AT the time of the fire he had the
heaviest stock he ever carried, worth fully
| $4,000. The morning after the fire he
was called upon by james Woolley, the
insurance agent, who remarked that the
| stuff was total loss, and he had better
have it removed at once, which he did.
He was next called upon by three men
representing themselves rs adjusters for
the insurance company, to one of whom,
Mr.. Irwin he gave the inventory of his
stock, which had been taken at the first
of the year. Mr.. Irwin asked permission
afterwards asked for it, but Mr. Irwin re-
fused, saying il was the property of the
insurance company and pnrt Of the proofs |
of loss. On account of not having the
inventory he was put to considerable de- |
lay and trouble in making out his proofs |
of loss. He twice wrote requests for the |
inventory, but no notice was taken of the |
letters.
The witness further testified to his losses |
in detail, and particularly as TO the cost |
price of the goods sold. On this point |
he described his profits, as follows Doors |
costing 81. apiece were sold mt $1.75; |
blinds costing 50 cents were sold at $1.50 |
and S1.75; sash costing As cents at so |
and 80 cents, frames costing $1.20 |
knocked down, at 50. 25 to $2.75 put to- |
gether; mouldings costing As cents per |
foot at 80 cents, His gross sales from |
January LIST, 1882, to September Sd, the |
date of the fire, amounted to $21, Col IS,
of which about so per cent was clear |
profit. The loss on the stock destroyed,
estimating at cost price, was SS12, S99.2l. |
He was removing his stuff to the Huns
berger Building, just prior to the fire, for
the purpose of making repairs to the
building, it needing II new roof and a
new floor.
AT l O'Clock court took recess until 3
p. m.
Immediately after the opening of court
the general jury was discharged from any
further attendance, 1t being the intention
to adjourn court finally upon the conclu-
sion of the pending case.
William II Pierson, the plaintiff in the
case against the Etna Insurance Com
pany, was subjected to a long cross
examination, after the opening Of court
in the afternoon, by Levi O. Bird,
ESD, of counsel for defence. He was
asked if he WAS in his building on the
Sunday of the fire and replied in the
negative. He also said he did not say to
Mr., Irwin, one OF the insurance adjusters,
that he stopped in Mt the factory that
Sunday afternoon on his way home from
Sunday-school, He denied having said,
when first asked for his inventory for
1882, that he had burned it in his office
stove some time previous, and having
sub equently told Mr.. Woolley. Mr..
Irwin and E. o. Weeks that he had lied
about the matter.
Being closely questioned as to an al
leg4d alteration in his books whereby the
figures $5,970.S5, the valuation placed
upon the stock on hand when the firm of
Pierson Il Brothers was dissolved. was
changed to Sis, 970.S5, the witness denied
that he had said he made the alteration to
get even with his brother and cheat him
out of $4,000; also, that he had said to
Mr.. Woolley that he made the alteration
1