Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1891-01-29
City and County.
Sup, Jud. Court, Jan. Civil Term, 1891


LUCIIUs A. EMERY, Justice Presiding,
JOHN +. kNowLToN, Clerk.
JAMES w PATTERSON, Sheriff.
ktEL T. SMITH, Stenographer.
LEWIS F. HOOPER, Crier
HARRY W. OsGooD, Messenger.
Wednesday, Jan. 81.
The first thing that came before the
court this morning was hearing in the
case, Wealthy Mann, appeal from the
Judge Of Probate.
II NJ. Mitchell appeared for Rebecca
Mann. 7. W. Nose for the other heirs.
INF FOLLOWING JURY WAS THEN IMpAS-
KLEp.
Carleton McGown, foreman, vslerious
Black, Jonathan Bridges, Walter J. Cream
er Isaac II. Emery, Caleb W Haskell,
William j. Lord, Oliver McNeal, Jesse
Meader, Fernando c Moon, Enoch n.
Moore. Mark T. Richardson.
sUrERNUMERARlEs.
John 4. Starr. Joseph S. Slower. Free
man @. Tracy, John X Veazie, Walter A.
Williams
The first case assigned for trial was The
knowles Steam Pump Works vs. VIM. f.
Hsdlock This was an action brought
fnr debt. it was not tried before the jury.
hut was settled between the parties.
iaemas w. Foley v. William T. Fol-
IT,, le Association of Philadelphia Trus-
,,t. was settled between the parties with
uu- trial.
I'ea>t Higgins Foster for Fire Asso.
t'r HI WiSwell, King 4 Pc
tiers for Alex. Mar
tin claimant
Fl"ari b. Rodlck IS. David A. Bunker.
Tbs was suit brought in plea of a cove
nsut broken The defendant had leased
from the plaintiff a certain lot or parcel
If land in Bar Harbor, prior to his petit
tiou into insolvency, and the action was
brought 20 recover the rent that accrued
during the period Of the defendants in
solvcncy. and after his discharge
This j. peculiar case, none Of its kind
ever having been ruled upon in this State.
The plaintiffs counsel brought in the
Ill
ants discharge from Insolvency.
The case was then withdrawn from the
Jury. and reported u the law court. The
mn. j., Ion, h. .i.,;.,.,
,.a-,,.. .-,,,,, ;,,-.,,..o,,.
son from covenant to pay rent that ac-
,r,s,t .4,,r;,,,, ,t,o 49,. 80 ;,a,,
t.4;..,
,-,.-l Tor p,r r.e..
az '''e oa>eS seisneu
'''' a. 'ei hoon 'iiele
'''''' BUSINESS HaHsacteu' a
Hui >Has' jan -
- INC Na>eS sneu LOT tfIal
'e'''eN oe'"een the parties
t'', !''s was eA'u>ea d. ~ ~ CLOCK
IN the afternoon there was an interest
I's hearing III the case, Hiram NJ. Nor
''n " Aaron II Gould and Manor Inn.
lAi> was All action brought to enforce a
..rH claim on said Manor Inn for labor
performed and material furnished on the
= d bu ding The defence claimed, the
plaintiffs labor for which he might have
had lien, if action had commenced with
y tne prescribed ninety days. was finished
n July Il, and that work charged on the
NJ. under the date of July 81 was sep
uccted with the first. The statement filed
with the town clerk by the claimant spec
ited that last wolk was done on the 3lst
DAY Of July The writ was dated oct. 30.
being more than ninety days after July 81.
The defendants claimed that this state
mcnt e>topped the claimant from offering
ty- .imony that any labor was performed
after that date The claimant attempted
gust l. The testimony on this point was
conflicting. They attempted to show that
u3rkmen went to Sullivan on July 80 and
remained over night and did last work on
Aug. !. While there, the men stopped at
Hotel Cieaves. The defendant asked the
court TO grant him time 10 produce the
hotel register. Thi, was objected to by
the claimant but was granted by the
court.
The case was then withdrawn and as
>.gned for jury trial the second day of
neat term.
WisweH. King \ Foster for Deft.
Peters for Plf
\ divorce case was heard by the court
Sarah A Baooidge vs. Richard H. Bao-
''i-e.
swell hing Peters
Friday, Jan. %.
Tie two cases of Dutton Admir- vs..
James A Davis were continued by consent.
Tie first jury trial OF the term was heard
Today, Isaac NJ Grant vs. Ellen Mosley.
This was an action IN aesumpslt, for dept
for supplies furnished two vessels OF the
defendant. The goods were delivered to
her son, the captain, she claiming that he
had no authority to purchase the same
The Plaintlh claimed that she had given
her consent by written order, which was
produced in court, and also by paying sums
Of money on the account, The defendant
claimed these were on her private account.
Verdict for plaintiff for face Of bill and