Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1893-11-30


a year ago. The suit will not come To
trial, having been settled out Of court. |
City Solicitor Elliott represents the city |
and Levi G.. Bird the plaintiff.
A jury was drawn to try the case OF
Samuel d. Forbes VS.. the Mayor and
Council of Wilmington.
Court then took a recess until 2.30
o'clock in the afternoon.
Soon after the superior court con-
vened Monday afternoon, Walter
Bacon asked that the time for filing the
return Of the commissioner in the d.
vorce case of Eliza Watkins Thomas VS..
| William II. Thomas be extended until
next Monday. The request was granted
William +. Smalley is the commissioner
in the case.
Francis Il. Hoffecker made return
of the commissioner in the divorce case
of Mary s., VS.. Wilmer o. Davis. In
| the divorce case of Laura +. VS.. George
p. Baldwin, Mr.. Hoffecker asked that
the time for filing the commissioners
return be extended two weeks.
The case of Samuel w. Shultz VS..
Samuel B. Forbes was then called. City
Solicitor Elliott appeared for the plaintiff
and Henry G. Conrad and II. II. Ward
for the defence. Mr.. Elliott in opening
said the case was an appeal from the de-
cision Of the municipal court. Samuel
| W. Shultz was formerly an officer of the
Board OF Health. He charged the de-
PENDANT with constructing cesspool on
the north side of Fifth street, between
Harrison and Franklin, and with failing
to abate the nuisance after being noti-
fed to do SO by the Board of Health.
| The records of the municipal court show
that warrant was issued for the de.
PENDANT, who made appearance in the
regular manner and hearing was fully
gone into ON October 18th, 1888. The
defendant was fined $50 and costs and
appealed the case.
The court directed the jury to find for
the defendant and the jury rendered a
verdict without leaving the box.
Court then adjourned.
Soon after the superior court convened
Tuesday jury was drawn to try the
| case of Rebecca Emmons VS.. Hope Lodge,
No. 81, ]. 0. D. +. Harry Emmons APP
peared for the plaintiff and IL. IL. Ward
for the defence.
Mr.. Emmons, in opening, said the plain
tiT was his mother. The suit was brought
to recover death benefits from the lodge,
for the husband of the plaintiff, and 500
Samuel Murphy, Jr., was called to prove
that William Emmons was a member of
Hope Lodge No. q. The witness said
he was contributing member OF the
lodge There was charge of delinquency
against the deceased for non-payment of
dues. The witness, turning to the ledger,
said that February Goth. 1890 Mr.. Emmons
was indebted to the lodge in the sum Of
Sa.40. March 18th the deceased was de-
linquent 45 cents. The last payment was
made March 10Th, 1880, and his dues were
65 cents. The witness said there was a
charge of delinquency preferred against
Mr.. Emmons at the time of his death.
The dues had been paid but not when they
became due.
Rebecca Emmons, the plaintiff took
the stand. She said she was the widow of
William Emmons. Her husband died
April 9Th, 1880. lie was in usual health.
she said, previous to his death. The
| plaintiff here rested. f
Mr.. Ward made motion for nom
suit His grounds WINS the absence of
proof by the plaintiff as to the amount of
! the Indebtedness of the lodge to the
, widow There was no proof he conteHded,
i that the deceased was third-degree men,
, Der in good standing, and nothing TO show
/ that he had so continued as member of
good standing for six months. as provided
in the bylaws of the lodge. Upon the
|
| suit.
The court held that this was matter
for the Jury to decide and refused the
motion for q non-suit.
e Mr.. Ward then addressed the jury. He
said that this was not u case Of charity,
4 but involved the legal rights of the
plaintiff and also the rights Of the lodge.
/ The fact that the deceased had been a
member of the lodge for a number OF
i. years had nothing to do with the case
e One of his first duties is to pay up his
. lodge dues regularly and being a member
t of the lodge the plaintiff knew that IL
he allowed himself to go in arrears he
a would not be beneficiary. 1t is ques.
q ton Of principle the lodge is standing on,
. Mr.. Ward said, and he commended that the
Z members had no right to pay out money
for death benefits when it was contrary tC
n the bylaws of the order, It having been
4 proven that Mr.. Emmons was delin
Z quent.
= Edwin Hrst was called by the defence
= to prove the records OF the order and The
y decision of the Sovereign Grand Lodge
. relative to cases of this kind. The records
n were offered in evidence.
. Recording Secretary Harry L. France
i read the minutes of the lodge, showing
q that overpaid dues had been voted to Mrs
y Emmons but after discussion at the
meetings of the lodge, the death benefit.
a were disallowed. A donation of 500 L
= the widow of William Emmons was re
, fused by vote of 7to3.
n William G. Perkins was called to show
q under what circumstances member /;
a entitled to benefits under the bylaws.
o MIR. Emmons said he would like tht
q witness to quote from the bylaws of thl
lodge and not give his opinions.
=, The case was interrupted at l o'clock
Z when Judge Cullen discharged the jury
until 2.3O o'clock Tuesday afternoon.
!, Judge Ball asked for publication in th,
divorce suit of Anton Skupski VS.. Mary
!, Skupski. Ex-Mayor Harrington is thu
i commissioner in the case The return
u fayors the granting Of the decree.
. William ). Hilles asked for judgmen
= in the foreign attachments cases of Hille
(. ~ Jones VS.. Ernest 8. Naylor for want o.
y appearance; also, William S. Hilles VS.
Catharine y. Christy, amount to be de
termined by jury of inquisition.
70 The hearing of the case of Rebecc'
r. Emmons VS.. Hope Lodge to recove
Il funeral expenses for the death of Viii
% liam Emmons, was resumed in superio
court in the afternoon. The time o
e the court was consumed by the argu
n ment of counsel. Mr.. Ward said tn
e case had been kept in very small com
70 pass. 1t had been confined to the by
laws OF the lodge, Mr.. Emmons being
q member of the lodge, he was subject Il
the bylaws and it was his duty to know
II them. In order to get benefits Mr.. War,
l. said that every member should pay thei
- regular dues. No ore who is in arrear
e is entitled to benefits. That is the situa
D. ton in the case.
D Harry Emmons said the plaintiff ha,
l. proved that the deceased was q membe