The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-02-03
DID NOT SETTLE.
Suits to Recover on InSu-
rance Policies.
Hearing on Petition for Anew
Trial in a Railroad Case.
An Executor Asks for Instructions.
DEGREES Entered.

The nrSt case beard In the appellate oil
vision of the Supreme Court today was
that of Dennis Cronin, eA., VS.. Elizabeth
Holland, ct al 1t was'a bill In equity for
instructions brought by Mr.. Cronin as
executor of the last will and testament of
jeremiah sullivan, late of this city, de-
ceased.
The t~estator left certain legacies by his
will including the following: Lizzie A.
Holland, S25J;Annie M. Whitmarsh, $50;
Agnes Holland, $50, and Mary Mahoney,
Dennis ii. sheahan, who was attorney
for the executor of thew i'll, stated that
the bill filed showed thst the estate was
not at present in condition to pay the
legacies, and that the testator from the
language used in the will in regard to
the legdcies named, which was as fol-
lows, Ito be paid, ETC., as soon as may
be conveniently done after my decease,h
meant TO postpone the payments.
Warren II. Perez, who represented the
parties to whom the legacies named
above were given, argued that his clients
were entitled to payment of the sum left
by the ~testator and that the property
should be SOLD to pay them.
Ballou Il Tower represented jeremiah
Brennan, a residuary legatee undo the
will.
The main part Of the deceased's prop
erty, which consisted OF q house and lot,
was left TO his. grandchildren.
cIAIM vERpIcT WAS UNJUsr
The petition of the New York. New
Haven q Hartford Railroad Company in
the case brought by Robert s. j. Whipple
against IL to recover damages for injuries
received i'm its employ, and which case a
jury decided against the petitioner, was
heard today.
The amoSnt of the verdict against the
big corporation in the other branch of the
court was $500.
Whipple was a head brakeman and on
the 22d of Decem Der, 1894, got of the en-
igne and in the performance Of his duty
started to 60 up a ladder to the top of a
against a telegraph pole that was incon-
veniently near to the car track. He was
knocked to the grond and at the trial be-
fore a jury on the Goth OF April, 1895,
Whipple testified that his spine was badly
injured and that he suffered other inju.
ries.
In the arguments today Frank T. Ar
mold, who represented the railroad COM
pany. dwelt principally on the point that
The plaintiff knew OF the position of the
pole which he struck and that the exer-
else of reasonable care on the part OF
Whipple would have prevented the acci-
dent. He also read afidavits which al
legged that Mr.. Mhipple was not as BADLY
injured az he claimed to have been.
These were introduced to sustain the Pc
tition on the grounds of newly-discovered
evidence.
Walter b. Vincent, attorney for Whip
pie, replied to the points made by Mr..
arnold at length, claiming that the Jury
had made no mistake in its decision and
that the alleged new evidence was not
sufficient to support the claim for a new
trial.
In the case of ri. j. Dubois VS.. Daniels
& Cornell, a final decree was entered dis
missing the bill without cost and a decree
was also entered in the case of Charles
H.. Warren, ct al, VS.. Providence foil
Company. ct al, Diminishing the defend
ants demurrers and directing the latter
TO answer the bill Of complaint within
30 days.