The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1894-08-07
THAT TWENTY THOUSAND.
Shall the Eastport Fire Sufferers Get
the Entire Contribution?

n SuiAous CaSe before inc Law tOurt
Yestcrday-Disposition of the Fire
Fund Questioned.
A curious, and, in fact, unique case, was
argued yesterday before the Law court. Tits
the case of Peter Doyle and nineteen others
against Patrick Whalen, Noel B. Mutt,
Alden Bradford and the inhabitants of the
city of Eastport.
AS is well known, in October, 1886, de-
struotive fire occurred in Eastport. The
whole business part of the town, together
with the business of many belonging to the
poorer class We're consumed. Large supplies
of money, food clothing and various other
articles were sent there from all over this
country, and some from the Provinces. to
relieve. the sufferers. The cash contribu-
tions amounted to little over forty-eight
thousand dollars. OF this sum Portland con-
tributed about ten thousand dollars. The
citizens Immediately chose committee of
twenty to take charge of the contributions.
That committee chose as subcommittee a
finance committee of three, who are the
three defendants named above, and an ex-
ecutIve committee.
This committee distributed TIN ough the
fall and winter succeeding the fire, all the
food and clothing and part of the money.
In March, 1887, having as they say, relieved
all case of distress resulting from the fire,
according to their best knowledge and be-
lief, they had remaining of the fund undis-
tributed, the sum of twenty thousand
dollars, which the executive committee in
vested in the town of EastpoIt four per
cent bonds, where it still remains, the in
come being paid over by the committee to
the town to be used in the support of the
poor.
The plaintiffs, alleging themselves to be
sufferers by the fire, bring this bill in
equity for themselves and for other like
sufferers asking the court to order the
funds placed in the hands of receiver, to
be by him distributed among the sufferers
by that fire of 1886.
The committee kept a full and most
accurate account of all their distributions
and records of their meetings and doings,
all of which are before the court. Nothing
seems to have been wasted. In fact the
complaint is rather of parsimony than of
extravaganza.
On the part of the defense it is claimed
that the evidence shows that before the
action of the committee was taken capital
izing the remaining twenty thousand
dollars, application for relief had become
infrequent; that although there.w people
who were willing to receive the balance of
the fund there were instances in which the
committee though either that there was no
distress or that the distress had been re-
lieved. They claim that all of these plain
tiffs, almost without exception. are persons
who have been relieved generously in pro-
portion to the amount they lost, and under
all the circumstances of the case have no
ground of complaint whatever, against the
committee. AS to the income OF. the capital
lied fund being used to relieve the town poor
the defendants do not seek to justify; they
did not intend that it should be used for
quite that purpose. Their intention was. as
theyssay, to give the overseer Of the poor an
opportunity to be more liberal with the
towns poor than he otherwise could be, if
confined to the ordinary appropriations and
the strict law governing the relief of
paupers.
On the other hand it is contended on the
part of these plaintiffs that this committee
saw that they were coming into possession
of large fund and early began to hedge
and make preparations for capitalizing it
and using it for this OF a kindred purpose,
lions; that instead of giving money as they
should TO relieve distress, in many cases
they loaned money to sufferers with which
to rebuild, taking mortgages back, some of
which have been foreclossed.
The defense claims that these plaintiffs
have,no such interest in the fund as entities
them to maintain this bill; that the money
was not donated to them as individuals, but
civ 10 ba Of
lieve cases of distress arising from the FIRE;
that distress has been relieved according to
their best Judgment. and the balance be-
longs to the public. They claim that to dis
tribute this fund now pro rata among all
the sufferers by fire would be to give the
bulk of it to the rich who do not need it.,
and would be greater perversion of the
purpose intended by the donors than the
use complained of in the bill.
The case was most thoroughly and ably
argued by Hon. Archibald MacNichol and
Hon. George A. Curran. both of Calais, for
the plaintiffs. and Hon. J. W. Symolds for
the defendants.
The following cases were. disposed of yes
terday:
WASHINGTON COUNTY.
Peter Dolye ct ais in equity VS.. Patrick
Whalen ct ais. Argued rally.
MacNichol
Symonds, Snow & Cook.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, a
Henry G. Peabody j. of P. VS.. Charles P.
Mattocks ct ais. Argued orally.
A. f. Moulton.
C. P. Mattocks. Gage and Strout
Somerset Railway in equity VS.. Lewis
Pierce ct ais. Argued orally.
Webb, johnson and Webb. Symonds, Snow
and Cook Drummond and Drummond for
plaintiffs.
D. D.. Stewart, Heath and Tuel, T. M
Drew, pro Sc, L. Pierce. pro Sc, N. and H.
B. Cleaves. Everett X. Drummond, for
defendant.
KENNEBEC COUNTY.
Lewis Pierce ct ais VS.. Aver ct ais.
Argued orally. Counsel same as in above
case.