Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1896-12-17

cause of the accident and described
how it would cause long g-continued
injury.
DR.. Morgan was followed by William
j. Hall, who lives at No. 902 Orange
street. The witness testified as to the
condition of the gutter previous to the
time the accident occurred. The plates
were loose and they would jar apart
when persons stepped on them. The
witness had twice pushed the two
plates together, on finding them
separated, and had once stepped in the
opening between the plates and torn
the heel off his boot The gutter was
in bad condition from 1893 to the time
Of the accident, and he often saw
people trip on the gutter plates. Testi-
mony was also given by Frank j.
Taylor and Pbilemma Chandler.
Previous to tho opening OF the
damage suit Tilghman Johnston report
ed that the appeal case Of Campigla VS..
Megary would probably be settled by
counsel.
Walter Hayes made a similar report
in the case of Shsrpley VS.. Barreil.
The case of Elliott vs.. p, w. & b. rail-
road was reported settled by John
Biggs, counsel for plaintiff.
Tine x-ray photographs and the bones
OF skeleton from the kneo down were
again the objects OF much interest in
the superior court Monday afternoon,
when DIR. John j. Jones was called to
the stand by counsel for the city, for
the purpose OF oontradicting the medi-
cal testimony offered by the plaintiff.
When the case was reopened Mr..
Knowles completed the cross examina-
finn of pbiIapnp,n GbnpdIar
Allan b. Clement, law student
with Bradford, Vandegrift &c Byrne,
testified to the condition of the gutter
plate during the year 1894 and said his
heel had caught in the plate twice.
j. II. Pierce and John b. Woodward
testified to the time the gutter and
plate were put into the pavement in
1871.
@. M. Leitch had visited Mrs Ewing
at her home several times since the
accident and testified that she ia only
able TO get about with difficulty. The
plaintiff then rested.
Mr.. Knowles asked for non-suit on
the ground that neither actual nor
constructive notice of any defect in
the gutter plate had been brought
home to the city, and therefore there
could be no negligence on their part.
Chief Justice Lore, however. declared
that to be matter for the Jury to de-
eide. and ordered the case to go on.
City Solicitor Harman followed with
a motion for non-suit on the ground
that the statutes exempt the city from
liabilities for damages where it is not
shown that the work was done by the
city. Judge Cullen said this point
had been decided in the Seward case,
and refused To entertain the motion.
Mr.. Knowles requested that the jury
be allowed to go and inspect the gutter,
but Mr.. Hilles interposed an objection,
saying that the gutter has been re-
paired since the .cident and that it
would be unfair TO grant the request.
Mr.. Knowles said that witnesses had
testified that the gutter Is IN the same
condition to-day that it was at the
time of the accident. The Chief Jus
tice interrupted him by saying that all
evidence as to its condition since Octo-
Der 18th, 1894, had been ruled out by
the court, and therefore the jury could
not 60 and inspect the place unless the
condition led up to it by their wit
n5sses.
Mr.. Knowles opened the case for the
defence. He told the jury he would
fully convince them thai there was
absolutely no notice to the city of
danger at the point and that tha city
was absolutely free from any liability
for damages. He called Jamos III.
Wilson. city engineer, to the stand.
Mr.. Wilson had plot of Ninth street
between Shipley and Orange, showing
the gutter plates on the sidewalks, and
also the steps and cellar-doors. He
explained tho measurements and fully
described the gutter and plate in ques-
tion. ~
j. Newlin Gawthrop, ex-Street and
Sewer commissioner. testified that he
was president of tie commission in
1894 and during his term of office mover
received any notice of defects in the
gutter or plates. Francis McCloskey
testified that ne had never received
notice of the gutter while street COM
missioner and had often passed over the
place.
Charles Baird, Henry +. Dure,
Charles Wbann, Walter Davis and
Officer Carmen Di Mare testified that
they had never seen anything dan
gerous about the guttor.
DIR. John j. Jones, the star witness
for the defence, was then called 10 the
stand. He testified that he was present
to hear the medical testimony OF the
other side at the solicitation of counsel
for the city. He conSiderod that Mrs.
Ewing was very inprudent not to call
in medical assistance Immediately after
the accident occurred. After telling
how the ankle should have been treated
he called for the X-ray photographs
and the skeleton bones. He fully de-
scribed the photograph and for three
quarters of an hour held the closest at.
tention of the court, jury and spscta-
tors. He dwelt carefully on the point
where he differed from DR.. Morgan in
regard to the outlines shown BY the |
photograph, and gave his reasons care
fully and clearly. So closely did he
hold the attention OF all that the court |
failed to notice that the time for adj
journment had arrived until reminded
of the fact by the factory whistles of !
the city.
Court then adjourned until 10 O'Clock
Tuesday morning.
additional court news on fifth page.l
Deliuaueut Tnx Colfectora