Evening journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1888-1932, 1889-02-13
LAST EDITION
ARGUMENT BEGUN.

Evidence in the Damage Case Against
the City All in-Arguments for the
Plaintiff. $500
The jury in the damage case of John
Robinson VS.. Francis @. Simpson, after
being out over ten hours and half,
came in at s. so o'clock last night and
rendered verdict Of $4,000 damages for
the plaintiff.
The Superior Court reconvened at 10
o'clock this morning, and at once resumed
the case of William II. Robinson against
the CITY. The cross-examination of John
r. Almond was finished by Mr.. Bird.
James H. Beggs, of the firm of James H.
Beggs & Co, testified to seeing differ
ence in the plaintiffs work after the
alleged rupture.
Catharine Perry, living on French
street, testified TO there being shallow
hole where the alleged accident occurred.
The cross examination of this witness
was rather amusing. She admitted not
knowing of its existence until recently.
Mr.. Bird asked her:
How did you come to know Of it?"
Il heard some people talking about
it, replied the witness.
Who did you hear talking about it?'
Some women, as usual, said the wit.
ness, at which there was a laugh.
What did they say?' persisting Mr..
Bird.
They said some one was going to the
city about it,
Officer Francis Ayres and James Ken
nedy testified that the hole was not dan
gerous.
Street Commissioner Francis McClos-
key testified that he did not receive
notice from any one as to the dangerous
condition of the sidewalk. In the cross
examination he admitted that DIR. Short
lidge has often called his attention to
dangerous places in the sidewalk aud
street, but did not recollect the doctor
calling his attention to this particular
place
William r. Roberts, employed at the
Delaware Terra Gotta Works, swore that
Robinson told him he believed that GER
tain heavy work he had done had some
thing to do with his sickness.
Thomas L. Stringfellow and Edward
Simmons, employed at Beggs's brick
yard, gave evidence concerning the work
at the brickyard, where the plaintiff was
employed.
Samuel Lewis, foreman of Beggs's
brickyard, testified that Robinson was
able to perform his work as well as before
he was ruptured. Witness was also rup-
tured, but felt no inconvenience from it.
Samuel Wadsworth. fireman at the
brickyard admitted that Robinson gave
him from SIS to $50.
With this witness the defence rested.
Mr.. Bird then put DIR. Shortlidge on
the stand in rebuttal He testified that
S. q =
With this witness both sides rested. Mr..
Bird cited several cases to the court and
at - o'clock Andrew E. Sandborn, ESQ.
began to review the evidence. Each side
was to have two hours in summing up.
Mr.. Sandborn occupied forty minutes
time. He stated five reasons why the
plaintiff should have damages, as fol-
lows:
First, the pain and inconvenience
caused by the rupture second, because
of the expense incurred for medical at
tendance and trusses; third, the charac-
ter of the injury. which is permanent
fourth, the determination Of the plain
tiffs bodily powers; fifth. his mental
pain and suffering caused by Ia dread of
sudden death Mr.. Sandborn closed by
asking for a verdict of $1,000
City Solicitor Horny G. Turner followed
Mr.. Sanborn, pleading until / o'clock
when court adjourned until o'clock
this afternoon. His line Of argument
was that the hole was not dangerous,
thot proper precaution in walking the
street of dark night was not taken.
that the plaintiff did the same work and
received the same wages as before
the injury and it was therefore
not serious enough to warrant him in
claiming damages