Delaware gazette and state journal., 1896-01-16
sUPERIoR ooUHr.


VIM he fietried--1be Case Of John ".
Wright vs. the Wilmington City Railway
Company.
Tho jury in the damage case of Will
liam d. Wilckens Vs. the Mayor and
Council Of Wilmington, spent another
night in the Court House without
reaching an agreement, and was dis
charged on Thursday from any further
attendance. 1t had been out for As
hours 10 the surprise of most people,
and contrary to Wednesdays reports,
the jury had q majority in favor OF the
plaintiff, for it stood nine for Wilckens
and three for the city.
A few minutes after court opened the
jury was brought in and after being
questioned by the Chief Justice again
retired. Thereupon the Chief Justice
remarked that they had been out 49
hours, that he knew them to be con
scientious men and the Court did not
wish to compel them, through their
stomachs, to go contrary to their
brains. He asked the attorneys If they
had any objections to discharging the
jury. Mr.. Bird favored the three join
ing with the nine Judge Lore ex-
pressed the opinion that in civil suits
when the jury stands nine to three the
law should allow verdict. City Solici-
tor Harman interposed no objection to
discharging the jury. Soon thereafter
the jury was discharged.
Court adjourned until 10 O'Clock Fri
day morning.
On the first ballot the jury stood
eight for Wilckens and four for tho
city. One of the four afterwards
changed his vote and tho subsequent
ballots were nine to three. Twenty
one ballots were taken without reach
ing an agreement. The jurors who
stood by the city are Samuel ID. Arm
strong, Samuel Gregg and William
Derrickson.
Court reconvened Friday morning.
In tho certiorari case OF Andrew
Srecr VS.. Vincent .. Hill, it appeared
that exceptions bad been filed to tho
issuance of an execution, more than
three Ryears after judgment was OBJ
tanned.
A justice of the peace three years
after judgment was obtained attempted
to issue execution. Finding it irregu-
lar he set 1t aside. The Court ruled
that it was beyond the time limited
for Issuing tho same, and setting tho
execution aside, affirmed the Judgment,
Lht CpHlo VI lup tCILlOIdI1 MeIb Dul
upon Hill. Thomas Davis represented
Speer, and Martin B. Burris appeared
for Hill
Court adjourned until 10 o'clock
Saturday morning.
Attorneys Bird and Sanborn, counsel
for the plaintiff in the suit of WiIclSens
Vs. the Mayor and Council, have en-
tered judgment against Wilckens in
the sum of 81, 500. The damage case
will be pushed to another trial.
The court judges retired to chambers
Saturday morning and heard arguments
in the Addicks case as. to who shall pay
the costs. The court reserved decision.
The suit of John W. Wright Vs. the
Wilmington City Railway Go. for
So 600 was begun in the superior court
Monday morning. Wright is an ex.motor-
man, who alleges that broken frog ON
Eleventh street bridge choked the,
brake lever and permanently injured
his arm. lie is represented by Arte-
mas Smith and Peter l.. Cooper. The
railway company's attorney is Willard
Salisbury.
After the opening of court Prothono-
tary Woolley called OF the names Of the
special jurors, but several were absent.
After some delay the following jurors
were selected to try the case; Levi @.
Scott, Bernard Dalton, Isaac r. Staats,
John w. Carron, Thomas Maloney,
William Lockerman, William Deakyne
Joseph Derrickson, Alonzo S. Whit
tock, Herbert Yeates, William NJ. Stuc-
kert, Clarence Il. Poole.
Mr.. Cooper, in opening for the plain
tiff, said that the accident occurred on
September 21th, 1891, on the Eleventh
street bridge. He declared thas the
company was guilty of maintaining a
defective track. He said that the
plaintiff was permanently injured by
reason of its negligence. His arm was
useless. and was apt to become dead or
pgralyzed.
William B. Carswell, civil engineer,
testified TO plot of the bridge and the
frogs and tracks upon it,
John ", Wright, tho plaintiff, was
called TO the stand. His injured right
arm was in his pocket, and the court
was about to allow him 10 be sworn
with his left hand upon the Bible, but
he was able TO place his right hand on
the book and was SO sworn. lie raised
the book to his lips with the help of
his left hand. He testified that he
had worked for the company legs than
three years at the time OF the accident.
On the morning in question he left
Vandever avenue at o. 40 O'Clock; tho
current was very poor Mr.. Salisbury
objected to testimony in regard to the
current and the Court ruled it out,
the ground being that ip the narr Mr..
Cooper had not set forth any allega-
tion of defect in the motive power,
Wright related the story Of the acci-
dent. Ho was coming across the bridge
when he saw men working on the
track. One of them stepped from the
track and waved to.come on, Wright
moved ahead and noticed loose bolt
alongside the broken frog, The car
struck the section that was being re-
paired and piece of the frog that was
sticking up caught in the shoe of the
brake. That checked the car and
iurred il back and forth. Wright was
thrown against the window and his
right hand was twisted by the brake
lever. Tho brake lever struck him in
the chest. Ii was continual jump
with the car until it came to full
stop Witness said tho frog had been
broken all summer and he had notified
Mr.. Waitey and Mr.. Jones, who work
for the company.
The hearing was in progress when
court adjourned until 3 30 o'clock
The divorce case Of Mary L. jackson
vs. benjamin +. jackson has been re-
manded by tho Court to Medford II.
Cahoon, the commissioner who is to
take further testimony. Henry @.
Conrad represents the complainant and
Hugh @. Browne the respondent.
The REORGANIZATION Of Mr. Wright
was continued by Mr.. SauIsburY Mon