Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1897-10-19

r. H. Knapp, Newry.
SECOND JURY.
samuel Warren. Browndcid. Foreman.
William = Leaviu. Stow.
v II. L'tcbeid, stoneham.
! ". Macon, Rcthei
Chss- H. Merrill, Paris
Prank q. Noble. NORWAY.
4. y. fhilhrick. Ro1bury.
Gardner u. Rankin. Hiram.
Rc>coc q. Kicker, Hartford.
Dwight Z. Ro-c, Bethel
4. L. Rowe, oxford.
W. ; starhirsi, Paris.
sUrtxSusIRaRr.
Fred weid, Dixecld.
John X Howe Of Rumford, Amisl
Jones Of Buckheld, and Charles +.
Smith, Jr., OF Denmtrk, were excused
from serving.
There was good attendance st the
opening session Of members OF the Ok
ford Bar, with several visitors from
other counties, including Hon. c. T..
Littlefeld of Rocklsnd, W. +. Perkins
and George =. Clifford OF Cornish, and
Thos. Leigh, Jr., Of Augusta.
Following the organization OF the
court. the rest Of the forenoon session
vas occupied with the call Of the docket
and assignment Of cases for trial. Twen-
" cases were placed on the trial llst.
CHAPMAN vs.. RisBEE.
Tuesday afternoon Was begun the
trial of the case, Harold Il. Chapman vs..
Robert &. Bisbee. An action 10 recover
for damages alleged TO result from =
collision OF Chapmsn's team and Bisbee's
bicycle.
The parties are, or were AZ the time OF
the accident, residents OF Bethel. Mr..
Chapman was q farmer, who also car
ried on Dish business. The defendant
Bisbee Il the son Of Calvin Bishee, a
merchant Of that town, and Ii now 10
years OF age.
Ga the 25th OF April, 1896, Chapman
drove into Bethel village, hitched his
horse TO hitching post at the edge OF the
sidewalk on Main Street, aud went about
10 do some errsnds. shortly sfferwsrd
Bisbee came up the street on his bicycle,
and Il IL alleged by the plaintiff, riding
carelessly and not heedipg where he Was
going, ran against Chspmsn's spring
board, so frightening the horse that she
Jumped aud struggled, getting tangled
with the springooard, wrecking the
springbosrd and parts OF the harness,
and injurins the horse severely. The
horse WAS treated BY = veterinary for a
while, and was then TUNED out 10
pasture, but was afterwards found 10 be
growing worse, and hnally died.
The contention OF the defence wss
that the collision WAS not the result OF
Bisbee's carelessness, but that the team
Was hitched so rs To extend from the
sidewalk well towards the middle OF
the street; that Bisbee Was riding up
the street at safe distance, and tina,
when he WAS about opposite the team
the horse took fright at the bicycle, be-
gan plungipg, and backed the spring.
board against the bicycle. The defence
further maintains that the death Of the
horse was no; due TO this accident, but
that the horse was cured OF those In
juries. and subsequently, died from an
injury caused by sticking stub Into her
foot in the pasture.
There was more or less conflicting
testimony, especially with regard 10 the
position OF the team, and the PARTICULARS
OF the accident, several eyewitnesses of
which were called. The case, which APP
peared at firs, to promise short trial,
strung out over nearly two days; and
the hos; Of witnesses WAS so large, that
when the counsel for defendant called
his witnesses, and the judge loosely
asked him IL he was calling the poll list
OF Bethel, he replied. NO, I'm taking
hat the other side have left"
Verdict for plsintiff. cal so.
Herrick 4 Park for plaintiff; c. {.
Warren and Wright for defendant.
LIBBY vs.. TowLE.
Moses VI. Libby W.. George w. Towle
was the second case tried. The parties
live at Porter and Kerr Falls. This
was the second trial Of this case, which
was an action for Islander.
Libby, the plaintiff, came to Porter u
few years since, and la 1891 opened a
grocery store there. He married niece
OF Mr.. Towle, the defendant, who Is q
merchant OF considerable wealth and
influence. Mr.. and Mrs. Libby finally
separated, and In the spring Of 1882
an arrangement Of the property matters
Was made. Mr.. Libby took the real es'
tate. Mrs. Libby the personal property,
consisting of the furniture, etc., In the
boarding house owned by them. In or
der TO dispose Of the property together
Mr.. Libby took the furniture, giving foi
IL a note for $3.50, with q mortgage or
the furniture.
This note and mortgage were put II
the possession Of Mr.. Towle, and placed
In his desk. Later he noticed that the
note had not been signed, and when Mr.
Libby came into the store one day, ID
Il -. IN
said that IL that WAS the case II WAS AZ
oversight, and he would sign II. TOWN.
laid the note and mortgage on TIT
counter, and while Mr.. Libby WAS sigI
ing went TO another part Of the store Z,
visit on q customer. When he returned
according to Mr.. Libby's statement, h
nlscea the note inside the mortgage, ant
the mortgage la the safe. According .
Mr.. Toxie's story he did not see tn
note. but picked up the mortgage, sup
nosing the note was inside Ii, and laid
away.
In December Of that same year, an 81
temnt was made to effect settlement
hut IL WAS discovered that the note WA
, missing, and Mr.. libby declined to ps
, the note unless II was produced. MI
4 TOWle tn'TeupOus oSSOAoIuS W -
} hv.s story. told Mr.. Libby that b
thought he Libby had stolen the note
} or knew v here 10 was, or had destroye
, IL. Moreover he made remarks OF tn
: same purport at various times and place
and TO various peoplc-as one OF the a
> ,orueys expressed It, that WAS 1.-The bul
!, den az his song" The result was tina
; owing especially to Mr.. Towle's stant
. ing and influence in the community, y
I I.Ibby's standing VAS Injured, and D
9 credit was damaged, 90 that his credito,
D became alarmed, and attached bis gooe
and closed up his business. For the y
;aries thus sustained Mr.. Libby sues q
1.-The sum Of 5000.
a, In defence Mr.. Towle asserts tnat
never saw the note after be gave u
NJ. Libby TO sign; that be did not 9
cuse Nr. Libby Of stealing the note. D
ssid be ssthoueht Moses knew where
rent tor therefore BE did NOT accol
Mn Of : crime, and his words were n