The Somerset reporter. [volume] (Skowhegan, Me.) 1868-1909, 1890-09-18

John II. Mitchell, b. A. Sawyer, c. II,
Jones. r. S. Williams, Lyman Grant, f.
Z. Viles, deputies.
A. b. Fox, Messenger.
GRAND JURY.
B, F. Baker, Foreman, Skowhegan
George Foster, Canaan
j. +. Hilton, St. Adams
Benjamin Thompson, Pittsfeld
j. W. Hobart, Cornville
o. b. Clark, Cambridge
James Hughes Bingham
Alonzo d. Brackley, New Portland
o. b. French Scion
Ernest Hilton, Starks
James l. Girder, Mercer
Charles Z. Conforth, Faiaieh
Frank Z. Warren, Norrldgewock
| William Holbrook, Skowhegan
John X. Emery, Palmyra
John l.. Hight, Athens
Frank L. Welch, Madison
FIRST TRAVERSE JURY.
|. F. Lyford, Foreman, st. Adams
Norris E. Bray, Concord
Lewis G. Barker, Moscow
John N. Brown, Canaan
Greenwood c. Davenport, Brighton
A. B. Eaton, Cornvile
John Goodwin, Hartland
| Rodney Jones, Fairfield
Grin Z. Libby, Detroit
Wallace 4. Marble, Harmony
Harlow z. Merrill, Norrdgewock
I. w. Hanson, Palmyra
SECOND TRAVERSE JURY.
William Parsons, Foreman, New Portland
Josiah A. Page, Ripley
John IL. Rowell, Scion
Harrison Salley, Madison
George s. Stephens, Smlthdeld
Albert l.. Sylvester, 9 Pittsaeld
Benjamin X. Snow, Skowhegan
Henry A. Thompson, Starks
Owen b. Taylor, Norridgewock
John X. Webb, Skowhegan
Stillman A. Walker, Embden
Samuel Chapman, Athens
SuPERSuMARIEs.
Fred A. Dinsmore, Arson
L. J. Berry, Arson
Tnesday-Court came in at 10 O'Clock
A. M.
Rev. S. P. Smith of Skowhegan offlciat-
ed as chaplain. The day was occupied In
empanniling the juries, assigning cases
etc.
Somerset bar was represented Tuesday
by A. II. Ware, Augustine Simmons, j. j. |
Parlin, Ben. 8. Collins of Arson; Walton
& Walton, Merrill & Coffin, James Wright
VIM. NJ. L. Brown, Danforth & Gould, s. |
B. futile, o. Il. Bachelor, Skowhegan
Geo. C. Weeks, c. G Chapman, F. L. Nc
Fadden, Fairfield; Hon. Turner Buswell,
G. A. Cover, ISolon; Manson : Hovey,
and Abel Davis, Plttsneld; Hon. d. d.
Stewart, St. Adams; d. +. Thompson,
fIartland; T. 3. Barrett. Canaan; C. A.
Harrington, Edward Lowe, Norridge-
wock; c. A. WILDER, C. o. Small, Madi-
son; John F. Holman, Athens; s. s.
Hackett, Detroit; s. II. Willard, Mercer;
H. H. Patten. Bingham.
We also noticed there were In attend
ance from other counties, Hon. Hiram
Knowlton of Portland, L G Cornish, ESQ.
Of Augusta, volney A. Sprsgue, ESQ. Of
Dexter.
Wednesday, Sept. 72-There being no
case ready for jury trial the first jury was
excused until Thursday and the second
jury until Monday morning.
The following case WAS heard by the
Court:
Corisand W. Woodbridge, admx. w.
William T. Pettigrove.
This was an action upon . promissOry
note for $3.50, dated January 90, 1880,
payable on demand, with interest at &
percent. given by the deft. to the plf's.
husband. The defense was the statute
OF limitations. 1t appeared that Charles
Woodbridge, the plf's. husband, died
May IA, 1881, leaving what purported TO
be will, the validity Of which was con-
tested on the ground Of want of testament
airy capacity. The litigation In relation to
the validity Of the will was continued till
the September term of the Supreme
judicial Court, 1888, when the will was
disallowed. The plf. was appointed ad-
ministratrix on her husbands estate at
the November term Of the probate court,
1883. Payment Of the note was demand
cd by the plTs. attorney, August 28,
was thereupon bought Sept. 25, 1889. Mr..
Field, attorney for the deft., commended
that, inasmuch - the statute Of limita-
tons had commenced to run before Mr.
Woodbridge's death, It continued to run
afterward; and more than six yesrs hav-
ing elapsed from the time Of the max
Ing OF the note to the time Of the com.
mencement Of the suit, an action thereon
was barred, and cited 0reenleaf on evil
dence In support VI the proposition. Mr..
Stewart, attorney for the plfr, contended
that the rule Of law referred to by the
defts. counsel was never In force In
Maine or Massachusetts, and that the
time between the death Of the payee of
note and the appointment of the plff, as
administratrix, was not to be reckoned as
any portion Of the six years mentioned
In the statute Of limitations; and that the
action was seasOnably commenced; and
cited many authorities In support Of the
position. The presiding justice, being of
opinion that the action WAS not barred by
the ststute Of limitations, ordered judg-
mant for the plaintiff for the amount due
upon the note.
Stewart for plf. Field for oft.