Delaware gazette and state journal., 1895-10-03

whose death occurred at the residence |
of his father, in Milford, on Friday |
evening, April 26th, 1885, in the Seth |
year of his age.
Resolved, That although young in |
years, our deceased associate had won
our esteem and confidence BY reason of
his honesty and fairness as man, his |
studious habits and business-like
methods as a young lawyer and his
general kindness as a friend
Resolved, That, remembering the
rectitude Of his life and the Chris
tian graces which adorn it, we believe
that for him ''to die was gain,
although the Providence that decided
the early closing Of 30 young and
promising life is inscrutable to us.
Resolved, That copies of these reso-
lutions be sent to the family OF our de-
ceased brother, and that they be spread
upon the records of the superior court
and court of chancery of this State.
Court convened at o'clock Friday
morning, hut owing to the absence Of
Judge Cullen there was no business.
The case of Cash vs.. the Reliance Fire
Co. was called, but was continued until
IL O'Clock Monday morning, to which
time court adjourned.
The case OF Cash vs.. the Reliance
Fire Co. was called in the superior
court at noon Monday. Joseph Cash,
the petitioner for mandamus, was put
on the stand. He stated that the com
pany owns the property at Fourth and
Lombard streets, the ground having
been purchased from man named
Francis about ID years ago, and he
estimated the real estate TO be valued
at about Sl5, 600, besides valuable per-
sonal property. He said hewas elected
a member OF the company on August
10th, 1866. At this poinp the books of
the company were referred to by
Messrs. Marvel and Hilles, counsel for
the petitioner Mr.. Cash stated that
he continued to he a member from that
time until last April, when he was ex-
PEELED. The present books of the COM
pany were also referred to, record of a
meeting held April 1st, 1906, showing
that Mr.. Cash was expelled at that
time Mr.. Cash said he had received
no notice beforehand telling him of the
contemplated action, but few days
after the meeting he received notice
from tho secretary telling him that his
name was ordered stricken from the
rolls of the company for the cost of a
shirt, no further explanation being
given in the notice, which was sub
mitted in evidence. The witness stated
that for number of years he had been
an honorary member. He stated that
he had made a request for reinstate-
ment, but was told that he had no more
right at the meetings. He had asked
President Patrick Murphy and Secre-
tary James Kane about his member
ship, and both had told him that he
was no longer member. Counsel for
the petitioner offered in evidence tho
deed of the David Bush farm, which
was donated to the fire companies, his
object being to get at the value of the
company's real and personal property.
Mr.. Clsh was called upon to give a
description of the building and the
uses of the several rooms
Mr.. Biggs, referring to.the minutes
of the meeting of April I'd, 1877, found
that Mr.. Cash was expelled at that
time. The petitioner said he had no
recollection of being expelled at that
time, and he had never asked to be
reinstated. Mr.. Biggs asked the wit
ness If he was indebted to the com
pany for shirt valued at more than
81, but Mr.. Hilles objected to the
question being answered. Mr.. Hilles
contended that the court was not called
on to go into the merits of the pro-
ceedlngs before the company, but that
the court was called upon to decide as
to the regularity of the expulsion of
the petitioner. Mr.. Bggs held that it
was the province of the court to go
into the merits of the case, after which
Mr.. Hilles cited authorities to sustain
his (Hilles) claim. Mr.. Hilles said !;
''There are but two facts first, was
this man q member of the corporation,
and second, was he expelled without
notice?' Counsel engaged in tilt at
this point. Mr.. Biggs contended that
it would be necessary 10 ask certain
questions in order TO show that Mr..
Cash had notice that he would be eX-
PEELED. After counsel had finished the
controversy Mr.. Cash was again called
upon to answer the question which had
been asked. He said that he got bill
for 50. so for shirt and he rendered a
bill for SO. 25 for services, &C., and
that in reality the company owed him
Is cents. He said that on February
I'd, 1895, he knew the company claimed
that he owed them for the shirt. He
further stated that at the meeting held
on March 4th he was not given a
month in which to pay for the shirt.
Mr. Hiles proceeded to show that the
petitioner had been member of the
company since the minutes showed he
was expelled in 1877 by questioning the
witness, who said he had held an office
in the company for number of years
since then.
Mr.. Cash was still on the stand when
court adjourned until 80 O'Clock.
When superior court reconvened on
Monday afternoon Josiah Marvel, oi
counsel for the petitioner in the man
damus suit of Cash VS.. the Reliance
Fire Co., arose and specified the allega.
tipns made in the petition. He cited
authorities to show that Mr.. Cash had
been illegally expelled from member
ship in the company. Mr.. Marvel con
tended that MIR. Cash has made the
proper demand, and the only legal steE
| whereby he can be reinstated, and he
thought that the writ of mandamut
should be granted. He also referred
to the minutes OF the meeting wher
Mr.. Cash was first expelled.
Mr.. Hilles was followed by Mr.. Biggs
who argued against the petition. Mr..
4 Cash having acknowledged that h'
made inquiries about his expulsion OF
a Sunday. Mr.. Biggs argued that suci
application for reinstatement having
been made on that day, was no demanc
at all, as under the statutes work don't
on that day is not legal. Mr. Biggl
said that there must be a refusal of |
demand. He claimed that there neve
was demand for reinstatement, ant
consequently there was no refusal. Th
refusal was simply refusal to enter tn
meeting room of the company on