Delaware gazette and state journal., 1895-12-26
SUPERIOR COURT.
The Case of Harry Townsend vs.. The Com
inunwcalth Beneficial Association.

| suit awarded Mr. mOrrOW 81, iUU. 81.
The suit of Harry Townsend, ad-
ministrator. of Harriet Anne Webb, d.
b. a., VS.. the Commonwealth Beneficial
Association, an action for Sl20, was
next taken up. Philip Q. ChurcLman
represented the plaintiff and Thomas
Davis and William L. Lyman looked
after the interests of the defendant
company. Some little difficulty was
experienced in drawing the jury,
number of those called being chal-
lenged.
| According to Mr.. Churchman'S de.
caration to the jury, the history Of the
case is as follows: Harry Townsend,
young colored man, had his mother,
Harriet Anne Webb, insured in the
Prudential Life Insurance Co. Eigh-
teen months after the insurance shad
been placed with that company an
agent of the Common wealth concern,
who had been with the Prudential, APP
preached Townsend and made overtures
to him to transfer the business to the
Commonwealth. Townsend refused as
at that timo he was beneficial in the
Prudential and he thought the insur-
ance would have to be in vogue for
some time in the Commonwealth before
be would be entitled to any benefits in
the event of the death of his mother.
Finally, it is alleged, the agent of the
Commonwealth company agreed that
if the insurance be transferred to them
Mrs. Webb would become beneficial at
once. With this understanding the
transfer was made. Mrs Webb died
within year and claim was made
for the Sl20 benefits, which was the
amount called for in the policy. 1t is
| Ill 4lNs.N E,.s. 4r,
give that amount but offered to com
promise on one-thirl. Townsend de-
clinel to accept the $40 offered and
brought suit TO recover the full amount.
The plaintiff was the first witness
called, and before he had an oppor-
tunity to give any material evidence
court adjourned until 10 O'Clock Thurs
day morning.
AT Thursday mornings session Chas.
Fl. Collins, stated that at the time the
Webb policy was written he was an
agent of the Commonwealth company.
On cross examination be said that at
that time he had authority to issue ap-
plications for insurance. after which
he returned the applications to the
company for approval.
Harry Townsend stated that it was
represented to him by the agent of the
defendant company that be would pay
five cents a week less with them and
the beuefits would be only S. less than
if he remained in the Prudential COM
pany.
Charles Collins the former agent of
the defendant company, was recalled.
He acknowledged inducing Townsend
to change from one company to another.
He said he told Townsend that he
would become Immediately beneficial il
he made the transfer, provided he was
square with the Prudential company.
The account books with the Pruden-
tial and Commonwealth companies, the
application for policy in the latter
company and the policy itself were sub
mitted in evidence.
Judge Cullen ruled that even though
the company's bylaws might say that
insured parties would not be beneficial
for a certain period and should the
company make any different arrange
ments, said arrangements would be
binding.
Charles H. Hayward, local general
manager of the defendant company, be-
came i'll before he had an opportunity
to testify and was compelled to retire
from the room and sock a physician,
after which court took recess until 3
o'clock
The illness of Charles II. Hayward,
a witness, prevented the case of Harry
Townsend vs.. the Commonwealth Bene-
ficial Association from going on Thurs
day afternoon, and on Friday he was
still unwell and the case was continued
until January I'd, 1896
James w. Ponder stated that the
case of Ross vs.. the Brandywine Granite
| lad 1u.l l. l.,
tion it was marked off the trial list.
Argument on the exceptions to the
award of referees in the case of Will
liam II. Reynolds VS.. Daniel NJ. Coch-
ran will be heard at 8 O'Clock to-
morrow morning.
Argument in the case stated of Ed
ward g. Bradford of this city va the
Town Council of Newark was taken
up, William Michael Byrne represent
ing the plaintiff and Charles M. Curtis
the defendant. Mr.. Bradford sues to
rocover S157, taxes ON the buildings of
the Knauff Organ Co., which were pur-
chased by Mr.. Bradford. The defendant
claims that the buildings were exempt
from taxes for 10 years and the money
was, therefore, illegally collected.
The tax was levied, Mr.. Curtis
stated, as the buildings were idle and
of no benefit to the people Of the town,
and that the motive for eXempting the
plant from taxation waa as an induce
ment that it be operated. Mr.. Curtis
cited numerous authorities to support
his argument.
Mr.. Curtis said that if Mr. Bradford
had continued to operate the plant after
he secured possession of it and en-
ployed 10 men he would have been en-
titled to tho exemption. but as such
was not tho case the tax was legal.
After Mr.. Curtis had finished Chief
Justice Lore announced that decision
would probably be given Saturday,
after which adjournment was made TO
8 O'Clock Saturday morning.
In court on Saturday morning Mr..
Z. G. Bradford was awarded six cents
and costs in his suit against the Town
Council of Newark. Mr. Bradford
was the purchaser of the Knautf organ
works, upon which, on account of not
being in operation, the assessor of the
Town Council of Newark made an as
sessment and levied tax of Sl57. Mr..
Bradford refused to pay the tax on the
ground thar, by Legislative enactment.
the buildings were exempt for period
of 10 years after their erection. lie,
therefore, brought suit against the
Town Council for trespass in making
levy.
On the application of G. B. Evans,
counsel for the defendant, the breach
of promise suit of Annie Gratz VS..
John Putczkus, was discontinued, the
plaintiff being returned non est. T.. r.
Cochran, Jr represented the plaintifl.