Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1895-03-14
THE FLoon Vis sHaKr.
Testimony in the Damage Case OF Huber
W.. the jackson s. Sharp Co.

Testimony in the Damage Case OF Huber
vs.. the jackson s. sharp Co.
Considerable progress was made in
the Huber damage case Monday after |
noon and the testimony of seven wit. |
nesses had been taken when the time |
for adjournment arrived. James q. |
Foster sworo to the vibration of the
floor on which the Universal machine
rested, and said that when the revolving
saw was in motion the jar was so great
that it interfered with the operation of
the Universal and increased the danger
TO the operator. Samuel j. Bear testi-
fled that the floor shook 50 that Il was
impossible to keep lumber piled up in
any respectable condition.
Charles Crossgrove, John Pawling,
Albert S. Bcale and Charles M. Russell
all testified to the shaking Of the floor
when tho machine was In operation.
| This evidence went to show that the
defendants were negligent in failing to
remedy the defect in the floor, even
after their attention mad been called to
its unsteady condition.
The evidence adduced by the plaintiff in
the damage suit of Huber vs. the Jackson
q sharp Co. had u tendency to show that
the unsteady condition Of the ilOCr on
which the plaintiff was working caused
the floor to yiDrate to such an extent thut
il contributed to the danger ana made the
operation Of the Universal machine
hazardous undertaking. Charles NJ. Rus
sell and Harry {. Albright swore that the
floor was very shaky and that the revou-
ton Of the circular saw increased the
vibration and contributed to the danger.
John T. Davis said he was working for
the defendant company at the time Huber
was injured. He said blocks were put
under the floor after Huber was hurt, i'll
order to obviate the difficulty caused by
the vibration. Frank Sturtz gave similar
evidence
Byard widows said he was working for
the defendant company the time of the
accident. He saw Huber just before he
was injured and swure he was operating
the machine very carefully when his
fingers were caught in the knives Of the
machine and amputatcd. The witness
said the floor was In a very bad condition.
t Court took recess until 2.3O O'Clock.
The evidence adduced in the damage
suit of Martin q. Huber W.. the Jackson
Il Sharp Go. for 100000 damages, in
superior cour: Tue day afternoon,
/ went to show that the plaintiff was very
careful and painstakiug in operating
= the machine, and the floor on which the
! Universal machine rested was unsteady
: and shown to be in II shaky condition.
t Even Roberts, Robert ID. Jones, John
I Russell and Joseph Barrett were called
| during the afternoon and their testi-
Q mony tended to show that the vibration
c Of the floor contributed to the danger
+. and the cause Of the accident.
/. William Ii. Little, a son-ln-law OF
Z Huber and an operator on the joiner
! machine, took the stand when court con
l yGnGd yesterday and told the jury
@ what he knew about the accident in
Q which Hlbcr was deprived OF the use
Of six fingers. The witness saw Huber
at work five minutes before the accident
and swore that the plaintiff was operat.
: ing the machine as carefully as possible
: The witness had worked on the joiner
side of the machine and mad finger cut
$ off by it. Little said he stopped work on
9 OccOunt Of the danger aud complained
u to Mr.. Baxter, the assistant superntend.
a ent, who told him TO report to Mr.
i Hume to have the matter rCmedied, The
!. witness said Mr.. Hume had admitted
4 the danger aud said: I'VE can't fiS
:. everything at once"
g Ex-senator Higgins cross.GXamined
!, the witness, but failed to shatter the
=, testimony which was given in cleai
!. and satisfactory manner.
o The plaintiff rested after calling
h Little, MI Bird having first announced
Q That the defendant had admitted thu
question Of Venue, and it would not b.
y deemed necessary to show that the cor
!, poratiou was located in Wilmington
4 New Castle county.
!. Mr.. Bates made the opening addres!
l. on behalf of the defence. lie said thu
le plea was the general one of not guilty
=. He said the plaintiff had no case upor
which they could recover in this court
and the defence proposed TO show tina
y the Jackson 4 Sharp Co. had no NOR,
to do with causing Of the accident thar
C. the eclipse OF tile moon. He said the,
ne proposed to prove that Huber cause,
ID the accident by his own negligence.
u Albert NJ. King, general suporinten
A; dent u the car shops of the jackson 4
1, Sharp Co, was the first witness Gale
by the defence. lie said he had bee
j, employed in that capacity about /
years and was Immediately responsible
N TO the president Of the company. NJ
6, Baxter is next in authority To the wi
ness in the car department. Nj. Hum
;h is foreman If the woodworking an
IT. machinery department. The eSamin;
2; tion Of the witness was under way whc
~ court took Il recess until 2.3O O'clock.