The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1897-11-19

Made Some Pointed Remarks.
The jury in the case of Miss Lizzie
Gilmartin, of Carbondale, against the
Lackawanna Valley Rapid Transit
company. yesterday returned a verdict
in favor of the plaintiff for $3.50. Miss
Gilmartin sued for the loss of her foot
and other injuries sustained by being
run down by one of the defendant COM
pany's cars on the night of June II,
1895. Mr.. Hand, attorney for the COM
pany. made application for new trial
forthwith.
The re-trial of the McHugh case was
commenced before Judge Gunster in
the morning. 1t was on all day and is
likely to continue until tomorrow or
later judging from the rate of pro-
gress attained yesterday. The attor-
neys are O'Brien q Kelly and John r.
Edwards for the plaintiff ard Major
Everett Warren, John +. SCragg and
Colonel F. j. Fitzsimmuns for the de-
fense.
The case is an action on the part of
A. j. McHugh against Bridget Nc
Hugh, exeCutriX of the estate of Rich
ard MCHugh. deceased, to recover on
a judgment note of $S0i.50 The defense
is that it has been paid in full and this
is an attempt to collect ii a second
time.
The note was originally for $500 and
was given by Richard McHugh to Mary
Pulver 1t was subsequently assigned
to a person named Ward, who after
wards assigned it to John Fitzpatrick,
trustee, who afterwards assigned it to
Mary MCHugh, sister of Richard Nc
Hugh. deceased. This last assignment
was in 1870, No revivals were made
until 1891, when Anthony j. McHugh,
nephew of Richard and Mary McHugh,
obtained an assignment of the judg-
ment from his aunt, Mary McHugh.
when he obtained this assignment
Richard MCHuEh was seriously ill. the
defendants contend, and everything
pointed towards his death. This as
signment. as well as the assignment
from Fitzpatrick to Mary McHugh,
We're not put on record, hut were left
with II. NJ. Hannah. attorney for Mary
McHugh, who entered them a few days
preceding Richards death.
THE NOTE PRESENTED.
The plaintiffs case was simply
presentation of the note and the court
records, which was made by John r.
Edwards The defense then started in
to prove that the note had been paid,
but never delivered, Mr.. Scragg maxi
ing the opening address.
Grocer George Reed and his wife
were Dut on the stand to testify to
conversations in 1888 or thereabouts in
which Mary McHugh acknowledged
having received full settlement for the
note. Mrs. Reed testified that Mary
came to her one day in their store on
Wyoming avenue and told her that she
had made a settlement with her brother
whereby she was to get $50 a month,
room and fuel for the remainder Of
her days in consideration of her can
ceiling the notes" which she held
against him. She told this to Mrs. Reed
in order to get her opinion as to
whether or not she had made a good
bargain. Mrs. Reed told her she
thought she had done well. But you
must remember" said Mary, II can
never have any other claim on my
brother 1t is a settlement in full of
all demands"
Another day, according to the testi-
mony of the Reeds, Mary McHugh was
in their store making some purchases
when Richard came in the back way
and recognizing his sisters voice, as
sailed her, saying: She has my notes
and won't give them up" Mary re-
piled: Il know it. | will give them to
you. but | can't give them now. No
harm viii! ever come to you from
them"
BY this. the defense tries to show
that the present judgment, which was
one of the notes referred to, was paid,
but held by Mary as a lever with which
to compel Richard to live uD to his
agreement in regard to supporting her
The plaintiff showed on cross-eXamin-
alton that this testimony about the
latter scene in the grocery store was
not referred to in the former trial by
either of the Reeds.
LAWYER ON THE STAND.
The only other witness was Attorney
Hannah. He was on the stand nearly
all afternoon, but he was permitted to
do little else than sit there. Major
Warren and Mr.. Kelly, who were ex-
amining him, became engaged in a
hot wrangle over the admission of tes-
timony and il was two hours before
the first question was propounded to
the witness.
1t was battle royal and was watched
with keen interest by score of law
yers. Once the combatants lost their
temper and said some things to one
another, but although provocation
enough was given, no blows were
struck.
This is the second trial of the case
At the former trial verdict was rem
dered in favor OF the plaintiff. Judge
Edwards awarded new trial on tech