Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1895-05-14
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT.
MAY TERN, 1895.
COURT OFFICERS.
Justice Presiding.


Enoch Foster, Justice Presiding.
Charles +. Whitman, Clerk.
Fred A. Porter. Sheriff.
II. T.. Hammond. Crier.
Mlnta s. Powers, Stenographer.
Eugene F. Smith, County Attorney.
w. A. Rarrows, Messenger.
Herrick c. Davis, Librarian.
The course Of justice began to run
smooth Tuesday morning, while the
mercury climbed higher and higher, and
the May sun poured down the concen-
trated essence Of boiled-down dog
Court officers and counsel mopped their
faces and pulled off their coats, and
sighed for summer clothing unless they
happened to have 1t. And still the mer-
curry climbed, until when the sun got
low in the west tempering breeze
sprsng up.
The court was opened with prayer by
Rev. Mr.. Wedge and the usual formal
proclamations. The jury was then en-
paneled as follows:
Clarence +. Barker, Bethel, Foreman.
Henry j. Bangs, Norway.
Emerson Billings, Woodstock.
f. Ii. Brown, Paris.
+. G. Cole, Buckfield.
j. III. Farrar, Grafton.
Henry F. Floyd, Peru.
John Hastings, Fryeburg.
Aaron Libby, Sweden.
Fred Sanborn, Denmark.
John 4. Weld, Canton.
Martin l.. wyman, Rumford.
W. II. Berry Of Hebron and Alpheus
Packard Of Mexico were excused.
The call Of the docket resulted In piac-
ing a total of eleven cases upon the trial
list, one Of which was soon after contin-
ued. The attendance Of attorneys WAS
light, number Of members OF the Ok
ford bar being absent. Among the visit
ing attorneys were George +. Clifford OF
Cornish, F. T.. Undertake Of Phillips,
and w. II. Newell OF Lewiston.
The rest Of the first day was occupied
with motions and minor matters.
|. Wallace Wason, administrator OF the
estate Of W. w. Mason, late Of Bethel,
VS.. Elias Thomas ct al. This was an
action brought to recover some $50 or
so claimed to be due the plaintiff Tor
hay furnished Thomas 4 Hastings. De-
fence claimed that the matter had been
settled except a small balance OF two or
three dollars, and the jury seemed to
take the same view Of IL, as they return
ed a verdict Of SAGA for the plaintiff.
Frye for plaintiff. Herrick & Park for
defence.
Wallace G.. Everett VS.. Herbert +.
Nillett. Parties live In Paris. The ac-
ton was brought TO recover balance
due on account, Everett's charge being
s3l 80 for wintering colt, with an Off
set OF nine dollars and some cents on de-
PENDANTS books. Defence was that the
account had been settled; that the colt
while In Everett's possession, had been
damaged, and that Everett had agreed
with Millett that the balance due should
Offset the damage, and they would call
| it square. Everett absolutely denies
making any such agreement. The two
parties were the only witnesses. Yer
dict for plsintifi, s26 SO. Wright for
plaintiff. Wilson for defendant.
These two short cases were all that
came to trial up TO Friday.
John ii. Hamlin vs.. Frank l.. Brett.
Parties reside in Norway. The action
WAS brought TO recover the value OF a
bicycle in the possession OF the defend
ant and claimed by the plaintiff. Mr..
Hamlin Is member OF the firm OF Ham
lin Il Bicknell, grocers, who incidentally
deal In bicycles. In September, 1891,
Mr.. Hamlin traded the bicycle TO Mr..
Brett for horse which Mr.. Hamlin says
Mr.. Brett represented as all right in every
way. Mr.. Hamlin soon found that the
horse was lame, and told Mr.. Brett that
the horse was not as represented, and
that he should expect Mr.. Brett TO take
the horse back and return the bicycle.
Mr.. Hamlin finally left the horse 10 Mr..
Brett's stable and subsequently demand
ed the bicycle, which WAS not returned.
Defendant claimed that his warranty
OF the horse was qualified warranty ;
that he represented the horse 10 be all
right as far as he knew; that the only
popularity he knew about the horse WAS
turning out of one forward foot, which
was apparent TO any one, and which was
seen by Mr.. Hsmlin before the trade was
made. Mr.. Brett regarded that the trade
was fairly completed, and that the
bicycle was his aud the horse was Mr..
Hamlin's. Quite number OF horsemen
were called to testify as TO the actual con-
dition of the horse, the testimony for
the plsintiff tending to show that the
horse had always been unsOund, while
that for the defence tended to show that
IL the horse was lame when returned by
Mr.. Hamlin, II was on account OF the
condition OF the shoes. Verdict for
defendant.
NJ. l.. Kimball and j. =. Swasey for
plaintiff. Wright for defendant.
The case of Hamlin vs.. Brett occupied
the day Friday and a part Of Saturday.
The rest Of the time on Saturday was oc-
cupied with the contested divorce case
of Thomas Griffin VS.. Grace Griffin.
| Parties live at Rumford Falls. The
cause alleged in the libel was gross and
confirmed habits Of intoxication, and the
evidence disclosed anything but happy
state Of affairs in the Griffin family.
Decision has not yet been rendered. A.
+. Stearns and George ID. Bisbee APP
peared for libelant; Swasey & Swasey
for libelee.
The jury was discharged Saturday
noon. There remain three matters TO be
disposed OF by hearings before the court,
which will probably take about two
days this week. They are as follows:
Hannibal G. Brown ct al. In equity, vs.. J. W.
kimball Co. ct ais.
Swasey. Libby.
Thomas Griffin vs.. David +. Murdoch. Argu-
ment on demurrer.
Swasey K Swasey. Frank 4 Larrabee.
Angie r. THOMAS, hbelant for divorce, vs..
William Thomas.
Swasey 4 Briggs Smith.
DIVORCES.
The following divorces have been de-
creed during the week: