The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1897-12-17

Nerdict--Mr. Soper Entertains with
One of His Characteristic Argu-
ments--Argum in the MarshaIl-
Rice Ejcctment Case.
-Four hours of yesterdays session of
argument court were consumed by the
speeches of the four attorneys i'm the
celebrated case of NJ. O. Webster
against Fred. j. Widmayer.
The suit grows out of a deal between
the Scranton Store company and the
Lackawanna Store company by which
the latter swallowed up the former.
Mr.. Webster, one of the directors of
the Scranton company, claims that
there is $1,000 owing him for his stock
in the old company. He brought suit
against the company, but when the
case came to bar he elected to make
F. j. Widmayer, defendant, Mr.. Wild
mayer having signed as president of
the company the paper on which the
suit was based.
The case was tried at the November
term of common pleas. Judge Arch
bald reserved the point as to whether
or not Widmayer was individually re-
sponsibe and told the jury that IL
should find for the defendant for $1,000.
subject to the reserved point. The
jury declined to follow the directions
of court. and after keeping them to-
gether over Thanksgiving he sent for
them on the morning following. took
the case out of their hands and directed
a verdict to enter for the plaintiff in
the sum of $1,000.
Yesterday the case came uD for ar
gument on the point reserved. Attor-
neys r. II. Holgate and Major Everett
Warren appeared for the plaintiff and
]. H. Burns and NJ. j. Martin for the
defense.
MR.. MARTINS ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Martin opened for the defend
ant, Widmayer. He claimed that the
court erred in directing a verdict after
the jury had failed to agree That if
there was no question of fact it should
not have been submitted at all. but
having once been submitted the jury
must agree or he discharged. and that
the court erred in finally directing a
verdict for plaintiff, Notwithstanding
the jury itself could not agree and
brought in no verdict at all
Mr.. Burns followed in support of
Widmayer's claim and argued that the
question before the court at the trial
was whether the paper signed by'Wid-
myer S president of the LackaWanna
store company could be used to hold
him individually liable. especially in
view of the fact brought out by the
plaintiff that Widmyer was duly au-
thOrized by the Store company to
make the agreement on which suit was
brought Mr.. Burns also attacked the
validity of the point reserved, claim
ing that the facts on which such a
point must be based had not been as
certained either by the jury or by
agreement of parties and were no.
where in the case definitely stated by
the court.
Mr.. Warren and Mr.. Holgate. for the
plaintiff, cOntended that there was
really no disputed question of fact in
the case. That the paper itself was
for the court to construe and that Web
ster supposed he was dealing with Mr..
Widmayer in his individual capacity.
The court listened with much appar-
ent interest and asked several ques-
tions, apparently with the idea of get
ting a clear understanding of what ap-
peared to the ordinary layman to he a
very complex case. The case occupied
about half the day and the court final
~ breathed a sigh of relief as the
papers were handed up.
MYERS-LITTS CASE.
Mr.. Newcomb appeared for a rule for
new trial in the case of A. S. Myers
against W. p. Lifts, i'm which $50 dam
ages were awardel the plaintiff at the
last term of civil court for false i'm
prisonment. Mr.. Soper opposed the
rule and as is his wont in making ar
guments, he kept the hearers in roars
of laughter.
1t is a case of son against SON in
law. Myers mother owns the farm
adjoining his own i'm Clarks Summit.
She lives with her daughter Mrs
Lifts. Mr.. Lifts decided to fence off
the mothers land and placed ninety
five fence posts on the ground Myers
removed the posts ana threw them
into the road, he having previously
given notice. it is claimed. of his in
tention to do so If an attempt was
made to build the fence. Lifts secured
search warrant and had Myers ar
rested for the larceny Of the posts. He
was taken before justice of the peace
and in default of $500 bail committed
to the county Jail, where he was in
carcerated twenty-four hours. While
he was in Jail the fence was erected.
The plaintiff alleged that the pro-
ceedings were irregular and that the
arrest was nothing less than persc-
cutiOn. The defense was that Myers is
bad man and that the only safe way
to deal with him in securing the return
OF the posts was 10 handle him with
out gloves. Mr.. SOper claimed that
Lifts knew where the fence posts were
and that there was no element of lar
Ceny in the case whatever As to
Myers reputation, Mr.. Sopcr said:
Your Honors, Byron Akerly secured
Buckwheat Hll for two davs with a
team and wagon and couldn't get any
body t. say aught against a. $. Myers
except his men. who had a grudge
against him"
NOTHING To ARGUE.
There is nothing before us to argue, "
said Mr.. Soper in winding up his
speech. I'VE are simply re-trying the