Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1893-06-08

| and uncovered Peter j. Furd's terra Gotta
sewer which was in the neIghborhUOd of
| tour feet underneath thr srnund.
Mr.. Nandeerift asked the witness whether
! or not an ordinary Storm would have car
ried away loo cart loads OF sand.
Mr. Bird objected to the question, but
thecourt Qverrn!rd the objection.
MIR. Bird noted an exception and the eX-
animation OF the witness was resumed.
ne witness was ont in the violent storm
| which burst over the city on Iulv 18th,
1871. lie was returning from New Castle,
| AZ party given 1T the residence of his
| father, eX.SherH William simmons. The
| duwnpuur of rain was so terrific that the
driver was unable To see where he was
| going, Two Of the wheels of the carriage
were upon the sidewalk and two in tile
| street. This was discovered by the fact
that the vehicle Collided With u lamp post.
| MI. Bird said he desired it to be under
| stood that this was the third witness the
| defence had called nj regard to storm lie
SAID thcrhling of the court in the Diamond
state Iron Company and IN the iIarrigan
| eases WAS that the defence should he
| limited 10 six witnesses
| Mr.. Bradford stated that no such ruling
| could he applied to this case, aud there
| We're more like 81 witnesses on this point
than SIX. He was i'll both those case, hat
| was not aware that the court had laid
/
| 10 by the learned counsel on the other
side, lie said such Il ruling would newt.
| ably result i'll intOlerahle injustice to the
defence.
lie said a most important element in
| tins Cusc WAS the character of that storm
Chief Justice Lore SAID that = rulmg 50
i general as to limit a side 10 siX witnesses
| where there was such magnitude of facts
| involved, would b., to his mind, Il VERY
| great injustice, He said THAT such aruling
could more properly be applied to one
| point such as personal character but
| where there WAS 4 varied amount Of facts
involved he Thought such Il ruling a hard
| shin.
Judge Culen said that lie deemed sich
q ruling an injustice, but if il was a fact
that such a ruling had been made hv the
coTrt, he did not feel disposed to depart
| from II.
The court at 20 o'clock retired to their
| parlnrs t. consider the matter
Alter the consultations was over, ,ludse
| Cullen said he was very sorry that ms
views did not agree with those of his
brother members of the bench, but he was
N favor IT limiting the witnesses to 10
or T.
chief Justice Lore said that court would
| not limit the number of witnesses
Police Officers Gum, Scott, Cohen and
| special Officer llerschUUk testified To the
severity Of the Storm.
Court took u recess until 30 O'Clock.
Thomas Bird, colurcd, was the first wit
ness called at the afternoon session lie
| WIS lhe lanitor a tho city hail and testi-
| ned that the storm OF July 18th, 1891 was
| OF unusual severity.
VI Bird rigdly examined the witness
| ana rot from him the statement that the
! heaviest rainfall Of July 18th, 1891, lei in
| Il period OF from 20 TO - minutes about
| u'clocl; IN the morning.
EN-Pullrenan John W. Darrell thought
! that twothrds Of the rain fell between
| the hours Of | and 8 oCurl In tllc morn
| ing ana continued about u minutes Tie
| witness hal been IN Sou,h America. but
| had never seen II rain harder in his life
| than 1t did on the morning OF july Goth.
| 1881.
Mr.. Bird, in Cruss.examinilgthe witness
| asked him in regard to tho character Of
the storm during the forepart of the night.
rs witness was unAblc to answer the
| question, but subsequently said that he
ga NOT know whether he would be washed
| away III tile Hood Or not.
| Mr., Bird
Tho witness denied thu lie saw either
| thr apparltion Of Noah or his ark.
III ms redirect examination by Mr
bradtori, the witness said he thought the
!
| dnwnpnur ot rain submerged the stecets OF
| the rty
Policeman John Soloman testified that
! tle storm was the seversst in his memory.
| lie had seen heavy rain storms but the
| storm OF 1891 was the sGverrst he had ever
| seen,
Thomas II Hoskins, lives at So. 1920
Lancaster avenue, He had never ,ccn
! more violent storm in the ~ Years he hac.
| lived in the CITY,
! Mr., NAndrgrlft attempted to show by
| me witness HAT the people in the locality
| Dullt these houses in u marshy lot with
inli knowledge Of the condition OF the
ground.
William Forrest said that when he
| looked out ol the window the water was
| M 10 tho curbstoup
| thG wltuuas was cross examined by MFR
| Bird. He said he had seen storms as
heavy as the one Of July 10Th, 1884 hut
| lhey uld not last Us long The witness
also said that II there had been more inlets
| IN the street the water would NOT have
| swept down ~ such volumes, but would
| have been cnrried into the sewer
| EA'rherilt simmons said he had brc,l a
| contractor ~ the city since 1868. lie tssti.
ned thai he had seen Front street prcyiou.
| TO the iioad Of 1901, He said that no
! ordinary ram storm would have was he'd
away 100 cart lOi.Us Of sand.
/ EN.FpNCc NcrEeauta Peterson and Ingram
| testified 10 the severity OF the storm.
| NJ r Bradford called Carroll T.. l,lssett,
i evil engineer Of Newark, Y. H.. VIVA had
| been a. engineer for II years, ana wEn
has taken . course abroad. iic HAS de-
| signed sewer systems in Wi.lialuspurt
hrAdlng, Long Branch Orange, n H.,
Nniletown ~ u. aud yuriyl., other
places.
Pending Mr., liassert. testimony, court
nd = #Rrtt Il F4 y