The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1896-11-11

1
OF Godfrey Morse and other stockhoidsr3
OF the Bay State Gas Company filed In y.
5. Court an order praying for the appoint
mont Of receiver. The matter will DO
argued on the first Monday In December.
Suit for Dg:@.ages,
At the afternoon session Of the United
states GOVT yesterday, In thS case Il
Blair was the first Witness His testimony
! WAS TO the effect that he had acquainted
Foreman Weber of the fact that the hood
| Of tho machine was broken. He stated
that tho reason no signed the paper chat
| the cause Of the accident was because
; Craig leaned over too far, was because he
was afrsid he would lose his position II hS
did not do 30.
After four or five witnesses testified to
the custom in the shop DR.. Pyle, gays
evidence regarding the amputation OF thA
plaintiffs arm.
When court convened this morning
George Watson wns the first witness. HS
worked for about three years at Blumenf
g9afs factory on the flushing machlneS
f7Jainos Watson worked In tho factory
when ths accident happened. He saw
Craig at work and saw that the bottom
slat was off. After Mr.. Patzowsky cana
on the scene he said that g--d-it there II
another s., 900 gone. The witness told tho
general superintendent that Craig had
not been fooling ut his work.
lie saw his hand In the rollers and tho
knives cutting 1t. Ho heard Blair tell
Boyle that the machine was out Of order,
and the latter told Blair to go to h.
John j. McQuaid deposed he was q
practical machinist and that 1t would be
unsafe to work-0n flushing machine with
II Stat broken off.
Tho plaintiff then called attorney Coch,
ran to the stand and asked him If q verdica
was obtained against the defendants would
tho money come from the defendants or an
insurance company. This raised legal
point and Mr.. Bird said he wanted to 500
If the company carried IN insurance on
its workmen The question was ruled
out. After calling the plaintiffs father to
prove the lads age the side rested.
Mr.. Hayes moved for anon suit on the
grounds that the plaintiff was aware Of
the danger. He contended that the
plaintiff acted recklessly at work. The
court thought that was the case for the
jury but Mir. Hayes continued his argut
mcnt. Tho motion for non.sut was
denied.
Mr. Hayes opened for the defense with
the statement that the plaintiff had beou
fully aware of the danger and would cong
trauict the statements OF the witnesses fot
tho plaintiff.
Edward Boyle, testified to iustructine
Craig how to take off the skins and warm
81 him about the danger of grabbing the
skin when It wrapped around the rolls.
When he put him on the PARTICULAR
machine the slat of the hood was broken,
Ho would stop the boys from catching the
skin when on the roller, No one ever
complained to him OF the condition of the
machine. In cross.Uxaminaton he ado
mitted that he knew that the machine was
dangerous
Frank Weber, foreman Of the beam
house, ucpas2d that he had no knowledge
of the spst2m Of catching the skins when
wrapped. ITo did not know the Stat was
broken until after the accident. Blair had
never called his attention TO the fact that
the Stat was broken Boyle had full charge
of the machinery.
The court then took recess until .
o'clock