The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1894-06-07
Case Still ON TRIAL
Defense Presenting Ib Evidence in The Shoe
maker Case.
verdict FOR THOMAS M'COURT
Given the Full Amount of His Claim
with lnterest-The Action in Tres
pass of the Tuffeys Against Those
Who Sold Their Household Goods.
Non suit Granted in Case of Powell
Against Borough Of Ounmore.

The action of Joseph Shoemaker
against the Delaware, Lackawsnna aud
Western Railroad company. continued
on trial before Judge Mcpherson yes-
terday. It is contended by tho defend
ant that its engines aro fitted with the
diamond stack, which contain the
best pattern Of spark arrssters, and
that IL would be Impossible fer spark
to escapa from the stack which would
SO. fire to u mill like that owned by
Mr. Shoemaker.
Yesterday morning one OF the dia-
mond stacks was brought into court
for examination by the jurors Near
the top of it is the spark arrester, IL
wire screen with One-eigth inch
mesh. The stack is over six feet in
heighth and considerable difficulty was
had in getting it into tho court room.
During the afternoon the testimony
Of y number of traiunan WAS intro
du3ed to prove that the mill took fire
from an adj)ining school building
which was burned at the same time
that the mill was. Practically, all Of
the testimony had bscn heard yester-
day when court a1journet.
VERDICT FOR MR. MCoURT
Before judge Archibald the case Of
Thomas McConrt against John Con-
my was tried. Tne cuse came before
the court on an appeal from an alder
mans decision. Mr.. McCourt formerly
conducted grocery store on South
Washington avenue and sued to recover
u store bill OF &lS0 which Mr. Conmy
owes since 1888 As y set off to this
Mr.. Conmy clpimed that Mr.. Nc
Court owes him $645 So for work
done in excavatng cellar and con-
structing stone wall. This had been
offered by Offset. TIE point was
raised by the attorney for the plaintiff
that the claim could not be offered as
the amount exceeded the sum over
which an alderman has jurisdiction.
This point was sustained, which de-
stroyed the defense. A verdict was
returned for Mr.. McCourt in the sum
of $2j9.62, the amount Of his claim with
interest.
Ex-Judge Stanton asked permission
to have the papers in the cases of John
Maguire and Margaret Dolan against
the Prudential Insurance company
amended. The request wac denied and
thereupon voluntary nonsuits were
taken in each cnse,
A QUESTION OF OWNERSHIP.
An action 10 trespass brought by
Patrick and Katherine Tuffsy against
Constable John s. Miller and John j.
Mahon was tried before Judge Gun.
ster. 1t was claimed by the plaintiffs
that Constable Miller, at the instance
Of Mr.. Mahon, sold for rent household
goods of Mrs Tuffey as the property of
her husband. The defense asserted
that the goods had been purchased by
Mr.. Tuffey on the installment plan and
were his property, and that at the time
of the sale it was not alleged that the
goods were owned by Mrs. Tuffey,
The jury retired at 2 80 to deliberate
The next case called was that of
Daniel Powell, administrator Of John
Powell deceased, Of Dunmore, against
the borough Of Dunmore. The borough
street commissioner moved the fences
at the front and rear of Mr.. Powell 8
property, decreasing its size. For the
loss of land suit was brought to recover
damages.
A non suit was granted on the
ground that it had not been shown
that the borough authorized the street
commissioner to move the fences. At
the same time a rule was granted to
show cause why the non suit should
not be stricken off, leave to be granted
on the argument to show the authority
of the street commissioner to perform
the work for the borough.