The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-01-17
The Verdict in the AylS-
worth Case.
Susan Smith Receivers Large
Sum From Her Father.
Trouble Over Bank DepOSit--Ap-
pellate Court Cases.

court and asked that they might be dis
charged on account OF their being unab
to agree. Judge Rogers refused the re-
quest, which was supposed by counsel
in the case was TO he granted. The Judge
told them that in veiw OF the great time
taken in the trial Of the case, the great
expense II had been to the parties inter-
esied and the importance OF the matter
involved he thought the members of the
jury should again try to agree. He
further said to them that they mig hit
bring in any of the three following
verdicts: they might find against the
will and codicils; they might lind for the
Will and codicil, and they might find for
the will and against the codicil. The jury
then retired.
This was the second time today that
the jury had come in with requests to
the court. About 10 O'Clock they sent to
Judge Rogers to find out IL they could
bring in verdict on the will and report
a disagreement on the codicil.
Ills honor carefully considered the
question propounded and at 1880 o'clock
he had the jury brought into court and
informed the mem bers OF II that he must
answer their question in the negative.
The verdict I'm ordCr TO be a complete
one must be on the will and the codicil.
There were several reports from the jury
room today, one OF the first was that the
jury stood eight in favor OF breaking the
will and four in favor OF sustaining 1t.
Shortly before the jnry came in authentic
information was received by the counsel
in the case that the jury had changed its
tone somew hat and stood seven in favor
OF sustaining the will aud five against ii.
Just after this ballot was taken the
members OF the jury declared an agree
ment to be impossible.
The Jury sswere a tired looking lot OF
men when they came into court this
noon, andd noe OF them desired TO nave
the stenographer's record OF certain parts
OF the evidence, but this OF course was
refused.
DAUGHTER SUES HER FATHER.
Susanu Smith of Johnston recovered
verdict against her father, John Smith OF
Riverside, a former resident of Johns
ton.
Susan claimed that for 10 years she had
worked in her fathers home and he had
promised to psy her for her labor. SO de-
voted wss she to him that she refused an
offer OF marriage that would have greatly
increased her amount of worldly goods.
The amount she sued for was 5000, and
she convinced the jury of the Justice of
her claim.
The defendant has been married three
times and at one tme owned property in
Johnston worth $40, 600 aud other prop
erty In Riverside. Susan i'm addition to
doing work at home, repaired these ten
ements. Mr.. Smith denied he ever prom
ised OF pay Susan anything for her la
borl and ssid his property was not now
worth over $4,000, that is. the property he
owned at Riverside when ;his suit was
begun. He had transferred this lately to
his third wife.
L. L. Champlin was counsel for Susan
and Page & Owen represented the de-
fendant.
WIDOW CLAIMS BANK DEPOSIT.
Before Chief Justice Mstteson and JUS
tices Stiness and Tillinghsst was this af-
te-noon a hearing on the bill of inter
pleader brought by the Citizens Savings
Bank sgainst Joasthan q. Park hurst,
Administrator ON the estate of Hugh Dom
nelly deceased.
The latter died on January 16, 1895, and
left a bank deposit of $500 in the institu-
tion above named. The administrator
claims this sum belongs TO the estate of
the deceased and Margaret Donnelly, who
claims 10 be the widow of the deceased,
retains the bank book, and swesrs that
tie night before Hugh died he gave it 20
her and told her it was hers TO let no one
take II from her.
Mrs. Margaret Donnelly was the first
witness and her testimony Id cross ex-
animation furnished much amusement
for the court.
p. J. Mccarthy represented the bank
and Il. p. Owen Mrs. Donnelly.
The following cases we're heard in the
appellate division today:
william ii. Wood ct al. We. wiliisam A.
Ham mond. Heard on allowance for
counsel fees.
William Hickey ct ell. W.. John T.
Ryan. Heard on exceptions to rulings of
the District Court OF the Tenth Judicial
District. The point involved was as To
the validity of a certain assignment OF
wages.
j. 4. Banigan for Plaintiff; II, j Car
roll or respondent.
Alice y. Smith vs.. Thomas r. Smith
and Others. Decree entered appointing
Elizabeth A. Smith guardian al litom for
b .ih Besths l.. Smith and Maosl q.
Smith.
Same VS.. seme. Decree for dover en-
tered and Lorin NJ. Cook appointed
master TO set of the same.
George Andrews ct nl W. Amey Slocnm.
Decree entered allowing expcnfcs or sd-
verfising, commissioners expenses and
.a.I l..~. sssr .