Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1891-06-11
PERSONALS.

Mr. Alfred c. Osgood, OF Bluehll, was in
town Saturday.
Capt. John w. Kane. Of Bluehill. is in
New York on business concerning his vessel
property.
Mr.. II. S. Whitman of the Boston Herald,
was in town last week.
Mrs. Geo. 2. Osgood, who has spent the
winter in Massachusetts. returned home last
week.
H. +. Hamn, Esq. was in Bangor. Sstur-
day on the way to Boston.
Mr.. Joseph Mason. who has been very
sick, is reported as improving.
Mrs. John W. Hill. recently OF Ship Har-
Dor. \. s.. was in this city. Sunday, the guest
of her sister, Mrs. A. B. Black.
Mr.. REM. Msddocks. keeper OF Mark Island
light station, Winter Harbor. is in town for
few days.
Mr.. |. S. johnson spent Friday night at
the Pond Avenue Hotel in this city. He and
his family are now at their summer residence
at Hancock Point. to spend the season.
Geo. W. Pettingil. Esq, OF West sullivan.
was in the city Tuesday.
Mrs. Samuel ROYAL. Jr., OF Steuben, came
to this city on Wednesday last and remained
over sunday.
MIR. Judson W. Watson. son OF Willard B.
Watson, ESD. OF Bismarck. No. Dakota is
now at the Watson homestead at South Han
cock, and will remain with his aunt, Mrs. j.
K. Bowler, during the summer and . rhaps
longer
Mrs. Chas. A. Lyon, OF Bangor, has been
spending a few DAYS in this city with her par
ents. Collector and Mrs. J. ID. Hopkins.
Mrs. Ellen ingalls, Dyer and daughter from
California. arrived in Sullivan on Saturday
last Mrs. Dyer is dau, hter OF the late b. f.
Ingalls,. formerly OF sullivan. and widow OF
Ephraim Dyer, formerly of the same place.
She returns to the home OF her childhood. af-
Ter an absence Of many years. We hear that
many OF the citizens OF sullivan were on the
wharf to receive her aud all joined in giving
her most hearty welcome. The AMERICAN
wishes to join with her many friend, in max
ing her welcome most cordial one.
The following decisions. with re>cripts,
have been given TO the public, from the law
court:
HANCOCK oJNIY.
Irene O. Alley ct AL In equity vs.. Sarah A.
Chase.
Rescript by Judge Walton. This is a suit
in equity presenting substantially the same
question litgaied in Chase vs.. Alley. 81 Maine,
24. that was an action Of dover. 1t wa, de-
Tended on substantially the same ground on
which this suit j. prosecuted The plaintiff,
Mrs Chase prevailed. The court i, now AK
ed to enioin her against enforcing her iuds-
ment, The court declines 10 do 50. or to fur
nish the plaintiffs in this suit with any other
remedy which will defeat Mr., Chase. right
10 have her dover n determined in that ac-
ton. And for the following reasons:
First /. Il settled rule in equity that when
party has an adequate remed, at law. suit
In equity TO enforce the same right cannot be
maintained There are a few exception. TO
the rule; bu: none OF them apply In This case.
The same right which the parties seek to en-
force IN thi- suit, not only could have been,
but sctuaily wA>. presented a ground ~ de-
fence In the action OF dover. and was passed
upon by the court. Ii not only might have
been. but 1t was in fact litigated in that suit
For that reason alone. II Tor no other. ii would
be the duty OF the court 10 refuse the relief
asked for in this suit.
Second In the action Of dover the Justice
presiding IT the trial in the court below in
>tructcd The jury that the evidence offered in
defence. q, ing 10 1t the most favorable con-
.tTuctiun OF which IL WIS susceptible. did not
constitute defence 10 the aCtiou. and the law
court SUSTAINED he ruling. And thi. ruling
was not based on formal or technical defects
in the eN dence: 1t was based on its Inherent
weakness, and utter in>ufficiency TO establish
the faci- on which the defence rested. And
for thi. reason. II there were no other. the
Il,l
asked for In this suit. Bill dismissed with
costs.
syl,anu- Jordan. in equity, vs. Sarah A.
Cha>r.
I!escript by Judge Wa,on-Thi- {, a ~uit
in equity presented al the same time and sup
ported by the same evidence As the foregoing
suit OF Alley y. Chase. and for one OF the
same reasons namely. the inherent weakness
and utter inefhciency Of the evidence IN sup
port Of he facts on which the right to the re-
lief asked for rests. The same entry must be
made.
Bill dismissed with costs.
Tobias l.. Roberts ct al. vs.. Fred +. Rich
ards ct al.
Eescript by Judge Virgin Where land
bounded southerly on the -esshore aud ex-
tending one league in width on each side OF a
river vt IL mouth. a. granted together with
the Island Of Mount Desert and other islands"
On the fore part OF said TWO front leagues
Held, that Ia ascertaining the location Of the
other islands" mentioned. the rule governing
'1sf-" between adjoining owners Of land sit
uat.d on the rear shore doe, not apply.
tn, defendants claim title TO one OF the six
Porcupinc I-lAnds in Frenchman's Bsy.
known Round Porcupiue through the State
II Maine. from the commonwealth OF Ma--a-
chu-eti- in 1919 and ls,5. The plaintiffs con
tend that the commonwealth. BY resolve 10
l-31. granted il with other Islands to one.
Gre.oire. 1t appeared that few months
thereafter \ special agent OF the Common
wealth and Gregore with Il surveyor pro-
credetl to the locality and established the line
Of the grant. Five year- sfierw ar,l- Gre -oire
conveyed all the land and islands granted. mem
tionin: IL island, by name. but not including
any OF the Porcuplnes or others i'll their .icin-
ity, and never atterw ard. so far a. the county
registry shows, attempted 10 convey any Of
the Porcupine islands On the other hand
the oOmmonw VT alth did subsequently, author
i've the location OF 800 acres the Porcupiue
Islands. Held: That in the absence OF any
more direct evidence OF the location Of the
J grant. these contemporaneou- and subsequent
acts OF the parties are sufficient evidence that
Round Porcupine was not included therein
To effect the decision of the real owner OF land,
the entry under dul, registered deed from
one having no title. must be followed by an
open, notorious, exclusive possession contin-
ued uninterruptedlv during the statute period.
Such a deed Is evidence OF the extent
Of the grantee. claim, but the registration i
constructive notice TO those only who would
claim under the same grantor.
The essential Use and occupation by one
/ claiming adversely must be of such unequiyo-
cal character will reasonably indicate 10 the
true owner visiting the premises during the
statute period. that, instead OF suggesting the
/ probable invasion of a mere occasional tres
pa>ser, they unmi-takably show an asserted,
exclusive appropriation and ownership.
The facts in this case are not such can
lay the foundation Of i presumed grant from
Massachusetts or Maine.
Judgment for defendants.
BluehiIl.