The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-07-12
A VERDICT UNDER SEAL.
LIVELY TALK IN TIE SUIT OVER
THE OLD JAIL LOTS SUIT.

The OLD JAIL LOTS SUIT.
The County Chain-Gang investigation
Aired in Court 49, Col. Walker, DR..
Lawton, Gel EstilI and Mr.. Dorset
on the stand-Judgs Harden's Charge
10 the Jury a Sealed Verdict
Brought in.
The session Of the city court yesterday
was taken up with the trial Of the suit
brought BY Col VIM. Garrard and
Alderman Herman Myers against
ChaS II. Dorset 10 recover 300 paid
on account Of $500 commission on the
old county jail lots, sold by Mr. Dorset 10
Col. Garrard and Alderman Myers. The
case was given 20 the jury a few minutes
before 6 O'Clock last night. The jury, after
being cut little over an hour, brought in
q sealed verdict which will be opened in
court this morning
The case was zsslously contested on each
side, and all of the surviving members Of
the old board Of commissioners
were on The witness stand during the day.
Col Walker and DIR. Lawton for the
plaintiffs, and Col J. H. Estill aud Mr.
Dorset, for the defendant. The antago-
nisms IN the old board, originating IN the
chain-eaug Investigation Of two years ago,
were pretty well exposed.
The plea of the plaintiffs was to the effect
that having bought the property for sl6,OOO
they had agreed to pav Dir DJrsett ~ per
cent. commission. amounting to S40O, OF
which they paid $500, on a misrepresenta-
tion Of Mr Dorsett that he was authorized
bv the county commissioners, who had put
the properly In his hands to sell, TO charge
o. F4YT7fzC
fixed SIG, 900 as the upset price on the prop
erty.
REFUSED TO PAY TEE COMMISSION.
After,vard the purchaser declined 20 pay
the remaining Sl00 claiming that Mr.. Dor
set had no authority t. collect 4 commls-
sion. and they brought suit t. recover the
commission already paid, holding that he
RsVe them 10 information concerning the
property nor took any action looking tothe
sale Of the same, which he should not have
done as q county commissioner and with
out pay.
Tie defense claimed that the property
was put in bis hands es a broker 10 sell, and
that the net price having been fixed by the
county, he was entitled 70 a commission,
aud that the plaintiffs willingly agreed to
it rather than have the property put up at
public cutlery, and thai II he had been act
ing in the capacity Of commissioner
sion was Illegally charged, the plaintiffs
knew him 90 be n commiss ioner, and acting
with that knowledge, they were pdrttcepS
crtlaijtis ana could not recover money paid
out for an Illegal act.
j. r. Saussy, ESQ, went further. In al
luding TO the purchase of other county
property ty Judge Brskine, II which the
latter said, before purchasing. that he would
not pay a commission, Mr.. Saussy said it
was fixed up by plaintiffs ia this suit TO
give them an excuse for bringing the suit
against Mr.. Dorsett.
The case was argued at length by S. b.
Adams, Esq, and j. X. Saussy, Esq, for
the defendant and ". q. Charlton for the
plaintiff.
THE JUDGES CHARGE.
The charge Of the Judge was lengthy and
was a review Of the claims of each side,
aud in addition he charged that if Mr.
Do!sstt as a real estate broker had been
authorized to charge a commission on the
sale OF the lots, Notwithstanding that be was
then couaty commissioner, he was entitled
TO charge q commission, for that it was not
in the regular line of his duties to become
the broker for the county without COM
pensati0n, any more than would physician
on the board be required to discharge the
duties Of & Jail physician because his pro-
fession fitted him for tho work. Mr.
Dorsett was not, however, entitled to
charge for any information that as a COM
missioner he was in duty bound to give,
but it was not material TO the issue whether
Mr. Dorset. had doue much or little to con-
summato the sale, for, il he was clearly
authorized b charge the commission on the
sale and did sell he was entitled to the
commission. If hs were not clearly author
izei to sell, then the money he had re-
ceived as commission must be paid
back TO the plaintiffs, and the
court declined 10 charge that plain
t1tfs could not recover because they had
consented TO an illssal act, because there
was no testimony to show, and the court
did not believe, that either Mr. Dorsett or
Col. Garrard had any thought or intention
of doing nm Illegal act, and none was done.
Mr.. Dorset WIS or believed he was author
lied 10 charge the commission, and Col
Garrard was evidently of the same opinion,
and paid the $500
M