Evening journal., 1895-03-05
AFTER HEAVY DAMAGES.
GEORGE 8. BUTTERwoRTH WANT
TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS,


Giving Him bad Name aud Causing
Him TO Lose Good Job-rhe Case
Before Superior Court.
There was small attendance on
Superior Court this morning. Judge
Marvil was absent, being still confined to
his hotel by illness.
In the Court OF General Sessions
Deputy Attorney General Branch II.
Giles appeared for Mrs Forrest ID.
Mount, who charges her husband with
desertion, and asked that an order be
made that Mount pay TO her monthly
allowance Of $40
In Superior Court Harry Emmons
asked for an order for costs In the case
Of James s Morrison va John McElwee
Levi G Bird obi scted as the affidavit did
not set forth the offense. The petition
will be amended.
The case OF George s. Butterworth VS..
John ID. Conrow, for SEQ 900 damages,
resulting from malicious and defamRtory
letters written TO William II Whittrsdge,
the Baltimore millionaire, by reason OF
which plaintiff lost his position aud suf-
/ fered considerable loss was heard
Lllburne Chandler represented Bitter
worth and Bradford, Vandegrift and
ByIne guarded the interests OF Conrow.
/ The facts in the case, as set forth by
Mr. Chandler. were that Butterwortb,
who had a wife and FIVE children had
been employed as manager Of Conrow's
place, on the Congo farm, four or FIVE
miles from Wilmington on the Philadel
/ phia pike, known as the Hanson Robin
son place, now owned by William Dupont
1 and known as Waolston Hall
Butterworth was paid $40 4 month
and certain perquisltes. When the
property was cold Butterworth sought
employment OF Whittredge Conrow
giving him letter OF recommendation
which be sent TO Baltimore. On March
1, he Was sent for by Mr.. Whittredge
and went there hrst turning the farm
over TO his successor.
After BntterWorth had reached his new
home, Conrow wrote and demanded q
settlement This didn't prove satisfsc.
tory TO Conrow and he then wrote 60
Wittridge, cAncelling his letter of
recommendation and stated that
Butterworth was untruthful aud dts
honest, had neglected his work by
remaining away from the farm for
months at q time, had sold articles be-
longing to Conrow and applied the
money to his own use and had taken
money for purchase Of supplies and had
them charged and reported them as paid
| for.
All these charges Butterworth claims
we're false and made maliclously aud
with an intention TO destroy his good
name ana chsracter, and which resulted
In his losing his employment.
George S Blu terworth, che plaintiff
was the frst witness. He swore that he
had known Conrow four years. and made
a contract with him to manage his farm
In Bellevue The duty was to care for
the farm, stock and mansion. The contract
was a verbal one and was for $40 a
month, $40 a month and boald for one
man, expenses Of operating farm. etc.
II sales would cover expense all right, II
not Conrow paid the balance
Mr. Butterworth produced his memo
randum book, showing sales, receipts and
expenditures In every case Conrow
owed balance to the credit Of witness
and when he paid 1t was never but !
trlfle over the debt.
The book was offered In evidence
Court adjourned to 2 30 this afternoon
Butterworth is on the stand this after
noon.