The Somerset reporter. [volume] (Skowhegan, Me.) 1868-1909, 1889-12-26

Lyman Grant, b. A. Sawyer, c. II. Jones,
Ruel Williams.
Thursday, Dec. 10 h.-wm. F. Colby
VS., Jas. b. Twaddle. Assumpait on this
note Madison, Oct. LIST. 1887, $3.50,
For value received promises to pay w.
+. Colby or order one hundred and fifty
dollars on demand with interest at six
per cent. (Signed) j. b. Twaddle.
Defense-True, | gave this note for
borrowed money but Jan. I, 1889 more
than fifteen months after the date of the
note. | went into insolvency and show a
| discharge by the probate court OF
Androscoggin county dated Dec. Is,
1888.
Reply-True, you show a discharge in
proper form, but you obtained this money
by fraudulent representations OF your
property. You said you owned the same
house and lot occupied by you In North
Arson village and another lot Of about
fifteen acres in the same village.
defense again. Perhaps did say that
owned the house and lot and did own
it. True had mortgaged it for $500;
II was worth S220O, but the other lot in
my wife's name never said owned
Paintih-True there was nothing said
by you one way or other about the mort
gage on the house and lot, but when you
said that you owned it, | had the right to
infer that there was no mortgage on it.
The suppression of the fact that there
were mortgages on 1t was a fraud.
Defense-Not so. The record was open
to inspection, besides | intended to pay
the note and should have done SO if had
been able.
The judge instructed the jury in sub
stance that IL the plaintiff sought salts
faction of the defendants abilit to pay,
aud for that purpose inquired of him
whether he owned the place where he
lived he was entitled to the information
and If the defendant told the plaintiff
that he did own it and with held the fact
that it was under mortgage, the suppress
sion of the truth was fraud in law, and
it was not sufficient answer for the de-
PENDANT to say that he intended to pay or
that the plaintiff could have had the in
formation by inquiry at the registry of
deeds.
Verdict for plaintiff sl79.95.
Friday Dec. 20M-Hram Burrill VS..
Frank Fitzgerald. Suit on two promissory
notes, one for $3.50, and another for 500
and on an account annexed, for s224,2l.
The defendants counsel neglect to file
account In off set and rather than accept
the plaintiffs credit of Sll2.90 in dimiu-
tion of his S244.2l charges thought he
would stand better to have the credit
stricken out, and file offer to be defaulted
for $3.50.
DEPENDENT for long while was oc-
cupying a farm of plaintiff, the Coburn
farm In Pittsfed, and claimed that the
charges were largely for advances for
blowing, gathering orchard, picking up
stones on that farm and for hauling wood
to Skowhegan. The plaintiff said that
defendant WAS occupying as tenant and
worked on his own account The first
note was given for horse mortgage back
for securely and afterwards returned.
The case was somewhat mixed.
The verdict was for plaintiff S32l.7l.
Merrill & Coffin, pf. Wright for deft.
The Grand Jury came into court Fri
day afternoon and reported ten indict-
ments; four for larceny, six for liquor.
Monday Dec 23d-Sheldon Reed VS..
Albert f. Hilton. Assumpsit on two
counts, first on this writing: "Athens,
Jan. 4. 1889, whereas | have this day
sold to Sheldon Reed parcel of land in
Cornville. and have taken his note for the
I'm of four hundred dollars, and in con-
sideration of said premises, hereby
agree to take In payment Of said note all
lumber hauled from said premises this
winter, and delivered ready for saving at
Creigton's Mill in said Athens, said lum-
Der to be merchantable, at the following
prices, birch, beech, maple and bass at 8
dollars per thousand feet; spruce, poplar
and elm at six dollars per thousand feet
In the log, said logs not to be less than
six inches in diameter at the smaller end,
and II said Reed shall land and deliver at
said place and In said manner, more than
enough to pay said note. | agree to take
the same at said prices and pay him the
balance due him for the same. (Signed)
A. F. Hilton"
Second-On the following account an
nexed
Albert T. Hilton to Sheldon Reed Dr.
Feb. 1889. To 76,337 feet Of Birch,
Beech, Maple and Bass, um-
Der at $500 per NJ. $6l0.60
To 1887 feet Of Elm, Pop
lar and Spruce lumber at
5000 per III. 1914
$70O.03
April 1889 To sticking up above
lumber at your request and
price agreed upon which
you promised to pay me. 6S,25
Bal. due S778.6S
Plaintiff bought that land for
$500, gave the 800 negotible note and
agreed to pay in lumber from the land.
The account annexed shows the quantity
l hauled and the prices. The plaintiff re-
fused to take the logs or the lumber after
the logs were sawed hence this suit.
Defense-True the defendant hauled a
quantity of logs from the land and de-
liyered them at Creighton's Mill yard but
not at the Mill boom ready for saving, as
the contract intended. He did not finish
the hauling till the expiration of the
three winter months. True he after
wards hauled the logs to the boom, but
not till after the expiration of the winter
months. True he shows the results of a
mill survey by Creighton, bnt that was
not by sworn surveyor and was not a
survey "in the log"
Plaintiff-True, the contract requires
the logs to be delivered ready for saving
Others were hauling and could not all
land on the same spot; we landed as near
as we could to the mill, we think that full
filled our part of the contract. The win
ter for logging purposes runs into March
and as long as shedding lasts. This was
hard wood lumber and not marketable till
seasoned. The lumber was all sawed and
stuck before the snow was off the ground.
The contract does not specify by whom
or how the log survey was to be deter
mined, the defendant agreed to take
Creighton's survey.
Defendant never agreed to take
Creighton's survey.
Court-If the plaintiff RECEIVERS OF all,
1t can only be on one count. If he recov-
ers on the special count. the lumber will
belong to him If he RECEIVERS or the &C.
count annexed, the lumber will belong to
the defendant. The measure of damages
would be different under the different
connts. He can't recover on either count
unless he has fulfilled the conditions of
the contract.
Reporter-There seems to be difficulty
In the plaintiffs recovering on the account
annexed, as the plaintiff has taken posses.
sion of the lumber and sold it to a rela
tive who has already removed some of It,
The jury seemed puzzled as to how
they came to there verdict, but finally
announced, that it was on the ground
that deft, did not take the lumber.
Verdict for plaintiff, 1920. Defend
ant excerpts.
Waltons for plfi.
Merrill & Coffin.
Monday. Foster Nelson OF Canaan
was arraigned on indictment for the lar
ceny of pocketbook containing the sum
of seventy dollars from Cyrus Written of
Canaan, pensioner Of the war. On this