The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-07-02
A BAD MEMBER.
Local Textile Workers
Lose Their Case.
Ugly Horse the Cause of An
Interesting Law Suit.
Mary E. L0thr0p Granted Divorce.
Anew Trustee Wanted.

Before Judge Wilbur and Jury was
begun this afternoon the trial of suit
brought by Florence q. Brodel by her
next friend to recover $4,000 damages from
Michael Greenan, Pawtucket grocer.
The plaintiff claims that about year and
a half ago, while she was going along
Copant street, she was injured.by a horse
In charge OF the defen dant's servant.
The horse was travelling the street and
was rather disposed to be contrary and
would suddenly stop and then start on a
wild run, and the driver could not man
age the animal at all In one Of bis sud
den dashes the horse went on the side
walk and knocked Florence down and
then steppeu on her right hand, badly
crushing that member. and injuring the
thumb SO badly that amputation was
necessary.
The unusual thing about the case was
that while Mr.. Greenan, the defendant,
had three Horses at the time il was not
that gentlemsn's horse that the driver
used, while out delivering groceries for
his employer the cay of the accident.
The driver had been for some time an
xious TO start in business for himself so
he nad purchased a horse from the street
railway company TO use with tip cart
and in order to test the animals good
wagon with the unfortunate result above
noted.
The defense was that no one was liable
for the accident. ii having resulted from
the uncomfortable acts of a horse that up
TO few m nutes before the accident was
supposed to possess more OF the dove
spirit than that of war steed. 1t WAS also
claimed by the defendant that, although
the driver was in his employ, he is not
responsible for the acts of the driver,
because he used the latter's own horse
without the defendants authority.
Claude j. Farnsworth was attorney for
the plaintiff and Joseph Ostield, Jr., for
the defendant.
MRS LoTHRoP GRANTED A DIVORCE.
The petition of Mary T.. Lothrop for a
divorce from her husband, Frederick
Leslie Iothrop, was granted bv Chief
Justice Matteson this morning. The case
was heard on depositions late Yesterday,
and the charges in the petition were ex-
treme cruelty and gross misbehavjor and
wickedness repugnant TO the marriage
covenant. Edwards q Angel represented
the petitioner and there was no appear
ance for Mr. Lothrop.
ARGUMENTS FINISHED.
The closing arguments in the Weaver
will case were continued totey, Attor-
noon, after having spoken nearly three
hours, and he was at once followed by
Irving Champlin, attorney for the pro-
ponents of the will. Although this trial
has been long one, the time taken in
the Ayleswortb will contest was some few
days longer.
TEXTILE WORKERS LOSE THEIR SUIT.
Among the cases heard In the Dis
trict Court by Judge Sweetland this
morning was that Of Local Union No. /,
Textile Workers, against Joseph Barrett.
The case was unique one, for the tex
tile workers is voluntary organization
and Barrett, the defendant, claims to be
a mem Der Of the as ociation.
IL was claimed on the part OF the plain
tiff that.the defendant was one OF a com
mittee OF strikers that had charge of an
excursion ana did not pay over the
money he received, which IL Is claimed
amounted TO some S13. 1he defendant,
through his attorneys, Bassett d Mitchell,
flied pleas In abatement of the writ "that
there is not, nor on the day OF the issu-
ance of this writ, nor ever since has there
been In nature any such person or thing
called the Local Union, No. 1, Textile
Workers as said writ above supDoses. - !
Then again Joseph Barrett claimed that
ss he was a member of the association
his name should have been used as one OF
the plaintiffs.
4. IA. Quinn was attorney for the
plaintiff, sno claimed that ~ clients were
not granted relief II would. lie inn
possible for partner to get relief when
one OF the mem bers OF tho firm had been
guilty OF embezzlement except by means
of equity proceedings.
Judge Sweetfand held that Barrett was
n partner with the other members OF the
association and the suit could not be
maintained. Mr.. Quinn took an appeal
from his hoDor's decision and tho case
will go to the appellate court and the
outcome OF the matter will be watched
with considerable interest. Barrett was
given judgment for costs.