The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1894-12-13
HEARD IN COURT.

-
Judge Rogers has handed down an opin-
lon In the famous Brown, Steese a. Clark
case, the effect OF which Is in brief that
John A. Cross, the plaintiff was fully en-
titled to judgment ON the verdict OF si1,-
b3l.2l anu the verdict should stand as re-
ported, that the Lippitt Woolen Com
pany be charged as trustee for Brown,
Steese & Clarke with 81 ,93S.39,
with interest from September IL,
1889; that the Wanskuck Company
aud the Riverside aud Oswego mills we're
not properly chargeable; that the plain
tif's motion To strike out certain portions
OF the garnishe affidavits be denied and
that the plaintiffs motion to have new
parties entered be denied. This case Is
one OF the most complicated ever before
when Cross attatfhed the wool OF
the hands of the Lippitt Woolen Com
pany, the Wanskuck and the Riverside
ana Cswego mills. A jury trial in the
Common Pleas Court gave Cross a verdict
and new trial was denied by the su-
preme Court. Various other suits and
counter claims have greatly complicated
the matter, so that il has been extremely
difficult to reach the real equity In the
matter.
Before Mr.. Justice Rogers the suit OF
John Ill. Sherman, administrator of the
estate OF Jeremiah Sherman, against the
Stafford Manufacturing Company was be-
gun today. THIS is a suit TO recover 5000
for ths injuries OF jeremiah Sherman, re-
sulting in death, which he received at the
works OF the defendant corporation in
January, 1885. Sherman was a night watch
man employed by the company and was
scalded by the breaking of q steam pipe.
After the opening OF the case the jury
went for view. Page Owen appear for
the plaintiff; AMI Ballou q Jackson for
the defendant.
Appellate Division.
The case of the Warwick and Coventry
Water Company against John B. AlleJ,
executor OF the will OF Enos Lapham,
came before the appellate division on the
order OF the court issuing an alter
native writ of mandamus. direct
ing the defendant TO surrender
In his possession into the custody of the
officers OF the company. The defendant
In replying set forth the facts OF the
organization of the water company, assert
that Enos Lapham gave the cole financial
support 10 the company and that the
water company is indebte to his estate
for more than 10000 for money expended
and interest thereon. The defendant de-
pies hat the petition Is presented by the
water company; that j. j. Arnold is
treasurer save as a meddlesome intruder,
and asserts no personal interest In the
matter. Lawyer James Iillinghast, in
reply, said that John j. Arpold's right TO
the Office OF treasurer could only be Il sted
by quo warranto proceedings. The plain
tiff, therefore, demurs TO the reply of the
defendant and asks for pre-emptory
writ.
Also before the appellate court the fol-
lowing: George Parsons Lathropvs. Visi-
fA~ Drfr ft..r. I<xsx. ~
This case was heard on the defendants s
demurrer to the plaintiffs declaration.
The declaration sets forth that
on May 8, 1893. the plaintiff
and defendant entered into a contract
in which Lathrop was engaged as editor
OF The Visitor for one year. The plaintiff
alleges breach OF contract inasmuch as
after June II, 1894, part OF the paper was
taken from his control by the owners OF
the paper. The plaintiff claims that by
thus limiting his control OF the matter
going into the paper his literary reputa
tion was endangered.
Maria Tayler pro ami VS.. John w. Slater
ct al In the above entitled cause II is
ordered that the defendants may have un-
til January 1st to answer, plead or demur
as they may be advised.
A decree was entered in the petition OF
the Elisha Dyer Ninton Home for change
of investment appointing Samuel Slater
Durfee master TO investigate the prayer
of The Home.
District Court.
The following civil cases were heard in
the District Court today:
Daniel w. Goodspeed ct ux. VS.. Delhert
CoucD, alias. Decision for plaintiff for
S22. 90 and costs.
Philip III. Rose vs.. Belinda A. Doyle.
Decision for plaintiff for 900.
Augustus Miller VS.. w. Watson.
Decision for plaintiff for s36.25 and costs
entered by agreement of counsel.
+ nma Mittesbaedt VS.. Alexander
Bransgrove. Judgment in favor of plain
tiff for S36 and costs entered.