The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-05-28
in THE COURTS.
James j. Whalen's Suit Against the
Union Railroad Company.
Tenant and Landlord Troubles--A Dis
puied Milk Bill.

In the case OF Lizzie Waterman VS..
Shepard Il Company the plaintiff was
this morning permitted to amend the
declaration. John Shepard, Jr., testified
that he did not know anything about the
accident until after the work in repairing
the building was all done, and the work
was not done by any one connected with
mis- firm. The changes in the store dur
ing which the accident occurred were
made early in April, 1895.
The taking of testimony in the case OF
James j. Whalen against the Union Rail-
road Company was completed late this
forenoon and arguments were begun. ID.
8. Baker mace the closing argument for
the defendant and Irving Champlin that
for the plaintiff.
Whalen claimed that he was thrown TO
the ground while trying to get off car,
the motorman having suddenly started
the same up suddenly. The amount sued
for was 5000.
TENANT AND LANDLORD TROUBLES.
Landlord William HanDum of 10 Dia-
mond street had former tenant, named
i. Kelser, summoned to attend the civil
division 6f the Distric Court this morn
ing. Mr.. Hannum claimed the defendant
owed him about si4, and that S34 of this
pairs he was forced to maize on the tene-
ment that Mr.. Kelser occupied. The
stories of the landlord varied and Judge
Sweetland heard much moro or less ex-
pert testimony on everything connected
with house, from torn wall paper to
defective chimney.
-Sweetfand- gave judgement Tor
the plaintiff for s3i.
CLAIM THEIR COLLECTOR KEPT FUNDS.
Another case tried in the same court
was thas OF LaDgan brothers of this
city, against James Il. Christmas to re-
cover S45.45. The plaintiffs sell goods Oh
tho installment ldan in surrounding
towns and he deien tant acted as one OF
their collectors. and they claim he went
to Worcester and failed to pay them S7S. 40
that he collected Tor the firm. Christ
mas was arrested in Worcester on Q
criminal complaint brought by the plain
tiffs in the present case, hut was prompt
Iy discharged by the court before which
he was brought for trial.
The difference between the amount he
collected and the amount sued for was re-
ceived by the firm in this way. Christ
mas had a weeks wages coming to him
and this was retained by his employer,
and he had purchased a bicycle and paid
SIS on the same and the plaintiff returned
the bicycle ant. got the money paid on 1t
back. One Of the plaintiffs testified that
the defendant had collected the money
and spent it.
The defendant denied that he had col
lected any money belonging to the plain
tiffs for which ne mad not accountea and
also said the conversation in Worcester
that one the members of the firm, had
testified to was much different from the
one related by that witness.
a LARGE AND DISPUTED MILK BILL
j. b. Cameron OF this city some short
time ago sold TO DR.. III. W. Heaton OF
Johnston q milk route. Cameron agreed
to 20 over the route and introduce the
new purchaser and to deliver DIR. Heaton
what milk he should want. Beth these
agreements were carried out by cameron,
but DIR. Heaton denies he ever got the
1920 quarts Of milk for which the former
has charged him. at the trial OF the case
the Doctors counsel, &. M. Lee, insisted
on the plaintiff telling the namo.of every
customer that milk was supplied to, and
the amount given each customer. This
made the trial long and tedious one for
Judge Ruerckert and Charles IL. Page,
Jr.. who was counsel for he plaintiff.
The amount ei the bin was Sl10, and
S1S. 43 had been paid on 1t.