Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1897-04-26
FOUR REscRIpTs.
Decisions Rendered BY the Law Court o,
Interesting Cases.

The following decisions of the law
court have been received by Clerk of
Courts Choate:
Inhabitants of Bangor VS.. Inhabitants
of Orneville. Rescript, Whitehouse. J
Assumpsit to recover for sums paid
by plaintiffs for support of insane per-
son at hospital. Two points are urged
in defence, viz: Want Of proper notice
and failure to keep proper record OF
proceeding respecting examination and
commitment
The notice was sent to the overseers
of the poor of defendant town from the
office of the overseers of the poor OF
Bangor by Il. c. Davis, overseer of
poor and secretary" 1t bears date Of
April g. 1894, and appears TO have beer
sent after the expenses of commitment
had been paid. and being the first no
tice sent must have been received be-
fore any payment by defendants. The
notice is sufficient to charge defendants
for all sums paid within three months
prior and for two years after cause of
action accrued.
1t is not questioned that barring the
omission to State, that the physicians
were also respectable the record
contains a statement of all facts
requisite TO establish the regularity OF
the proceedings and legal commit
ment. 1t is contended that the record
is not valid because not extended foi
nearly two years after the commitment.
1t appears that the record was made
during the municipal year Immediately
succeeding the commitment and 49, the
clerk, who continued to hold his office
by reelection. 1t is established in New
England that a clerk who has made al
erroneous or incomplete record may
while in Office or after reelection, com
plete such records. and where he con-
tinues in office for several years he may
amend former records Notwithstanding
intervening reflections.
Reasons are given for the delay-a
copy of the commitment and the or
ginaI certificate of the physician Were
preserved and from these as data the
record was made. The court is of the
opinion that such record is valid. As
to the objection that the record does
not state that the physicians were re
Specialize"
1t is the opinion OF the court, that
aided by the presumption in regard tc
public officers expressed by the maxim
that "all things are presumed to have
been done in due form the evidence Is
sufficient to justify the conclusion, tina,
there was full compliance with tbs
requirements Of the statute.
Judgment for plaintiff for $l01.0S
with interest from Dee. 10, 1894. Re
ceived April %. 1897.
Waldo county. State VS.. John r
Thomas Rescript. Whitehouse. j,
A omplaint-omitting formal parts
that the defendant did have in his pos
session II dead ruffed grouse. common
ly called partridge, which said grouse
were then and there intended by said
John +. Thomas for consumption out
side the limits of this State. ard the
said John F. Thomas on said 9th day Of
November aforesaid, unlawfully car
ried said grouse from said Morrill, to
said Belfast, and there delivered the
same to the Boston &; Bangor steam
ship Company. to be by said company
transported to Boston, adequately set
out but one offence under chapter p.
Private Laws of 1898; that is, of having
in his possession not alive. ruffed
grouse, commonly called cartridges. moi
intended for consumption within this
state.
This section also imposes the same
penalty for several other distinc;
offenses, as follows: Nor shall any
person or corporation carry or trans
port from place to place in open sea
son any Of the above mentioned birds.
unless open to view, tagged and plainly
labeled with the owners name and ac-
companied by him. Nor
shall any person or corporation carry
or transport at any enc time more than
IS of any one variety of birds above
named, as the property of one man.
This complaint does not set Gu,
either of these offences in adequate
terms. not the first because it does nof
allege that they were not open #
view, tagged and plainly labeled with
the owners name" not the second be-
cause it does not allege that they were
transported las the property of one
man"
Demurrer overruled. Case to stand
for trial
Piscataauis county. Charles E. Rich
ardson VS. Daniel F. Hoxie & al. Re
script Whitehouse. ].
Assumpsit to enforce a lien claim Oh
certain logs. The defendant contracted
to haul certain logs and in making UP
his teams he hired of the plaintlff !.
horse. double harness and double SLED
at an agreed price per month; during
part of the time the horse was used
alone and part of the time with an
other horse of the defendant, during all
the time the horse was driven by an
employe of defendant and was under
defendants control, the plalnti1f was
not engaged to drive the horse or per
form any labor in connection Win
these logs.
Upon these facts the court hoidS
that the plaintiff is not entitled TO q
lien on the logs He did not Witnin
the meaning of the statute labor al
cutting. hauling, rafting or driving
said logs or lumber ana therefore Il
not entitled to "a lien thereon for the
amount due for his personal services
and for the services performed by his
team
The plaintiff is entitled to judgmen'
against defendants personally. JUG
naent for plaintiff for $1,000 with IN
terest from the date of the writ. lie