Southern standard. (McMinnville, Tenn.) 1879-current, 1890-06-14

lCoO WHICH, DOlllO NOCloO b0NNSANN
down the standard of social life
which he had erected in his mind.
Nothing brought out quicker the lit
tie curses than the reading Of some
dead mans will with the clause, 81
give and bequeath to my wife for
life, or during her widowhood."
He often said no such man would get
to heaven. Britton was without
children and had a charming wife,
and he kept will for many years
which read; 81 don't want any of
my relations to have any Of my
property; / don't want my wife's re-
lations to have any of it. | give all
of my property to my wife to enable
her, if possible, to marry again"
His humor was unbounded; the
anecdotes of his life, put in book,
would be the delight of the drawing
room. His every act and every
word was humor itself, and this pas
sion reigned to the last moment of
his life.
Poor BrittOn-the beloved Of the
mountain har-died of cancer, hav-
ing fingered long and suffered much,
On his dying bed the ruling power
was strong. His old friend, George
j. Stubblefeld, called to see him,
and the conversation turned upon
claim set up by the town Of Alta
mont for property taken by the
Union soldiers during the war, when
Brltton said: "George, that is not
just claim; before l got down | had
the account made out, between the
government and the Altamonters,
and / found on balancing the account
that the AltamOnters stole $500 more
from the soldiers than the soldiers
stole from them"
BrittOn was counsel in the celebra-
ted dog case between John w. Nun
nelly and Alex. COlson, which was
tried by Judge Sam Anderson, sit
ting by interchange with Judge
Marchbanks; and perhaps the best
humor the bar of Tennessee has ever
listened to, was Britton's rendering
of Judge Anderson's charge. The
law suit was for an injury done dog
named Sharp, a slow-track dog,
which belonged to COlson. The taial
lasted one week. 1t was on top Of
the mountain, where there were no
books, ard the old Judge was greatly
perplexed about the law of the case.
The defense sought to be made was,
that Sharp was dog of bad charac-
ter, that he killed sheep, broke into
spring-houses, and gnawed hides in
the lanyard.
Britton's rendering of the charge
was in substance this: Gentlemen of
the jury: | am embarrassed for the
want of books: we are out in the
woods (Which was the case, for Grun-
dy county had just been organized
and the trial took place on the top of
the mountain), and | do not remem-
Der to have ever read any thing on
the dog law. 1t is said, gentlemen of
the jury, that dog is. foerCe nature,
and that he IS not and can not be
property, while on the other hand it
is said that he is a domestic animal
and not of wild nature, and the
court instructs you that this action
can be maintained, and that Colson
can recover of Nunnelley for setting
his bull pups on Sharp and tearing
his ears-if he did it-and of this,
gentlemen of the jury, you must be
the exclusive judges.
) 1t is said on the part of the plain
) tiffs counsel that the proof shows
, that Colson was hunter, and made
his living by his gun and his dog
: and that Sharp was slow track dog
? and that his value was impaired by
? loss of hearing in consequence of hi
ears being torn.
. Gentlemen Of the jury: the cOur
5 can not aid you upon the facts, thu
e court is of opinion that a fast dog
would be worth more than a SLOW
r dog, but you must look to the evi
< dence and not to the court on thi
/ point.
e Gentlemen of the jury the ques
4 that gives me most trouble is tn
e question of Sharp's character, set VI
e as defense. l hesitated about let
ting this evidence in: for 1 do no
r remember in all my reading-and
t have been forty years, either at tn
: bar or on the bench-to have rea
i any thing on the subject of a dog
+ character. But for fear of making
q mistake I have LET in the aVidpnc