Worcester morning daily spy. (Worcester, Mass.) 1888-1898, 1898-01-16
COURT CALENDAR.
A Rescript from the Supreme Court In
terpreting James II. Wallis Will.

heScrlpt from the supreme Court IN
terpretlng James II. Wallis Will.
A rescript in the case Of Charles E.
Shattuck, trustee, VS.. Mary E. Balloon,
appellant has been handed down by the
supreme court, the court ordering that
the decree be entered. that the sub-trust
be continued, and that the sub-trustee
pay over to Mrs. Dunlop and the chill
dren of George F. Wall and James H.
Wall, Jr., share and share alike as the
same shall be received, the income
which the principal trustee was direct
ed to pay him for the benefit of Eliza
beth Balloon during her life. The
court finds that from the whole will, it
satisfactorily appears that 1t was the
intention Of the testator that on the
death of Sarah Elizabeth Balloon, the
income which the principal trustee was
directed to pay to the sub-trustee for
her benefit, during her life, should con-
tinue to be paid to the sub-trustee after
her death, and should be divided by him
as received, share and share alike, be-
tween her child and the children of Geo.
+. Wall and James H. Wall, Jr."
The case was entered in the probate
court after the death Of Sarah e. Bal
com, in the way Of a petition of the
heirs for construction Of the will, and
from the decision of Judge Forbes,
Mary 70. Balloon, one of the respond
ents, appealed to the supreme court. I'm
der the will Of James H. Wall, Charles
r. Shattuck was appointed trustee, Sa-
ran II. Balloon being a beneficiary. She
died, leaving as her sole surviving child,
the respondent, Mary e. Balcom. After
the death of Mrs Balloon, the trustee
received conflicting claims upon the in
come which had previously been paid
to sub-trustee for Mrs Balloon, but
after her death, her heir claimed the
entire income, and the other grandchil-
dren under the will, claimed to share
ana share alike in the benefits of the
income. Charles E. Shattuck appeared
for himself; Albert Poor. Matthews &,
Thompson and Thomas H. Gage, Jr., for
the defendant.
SUIT AGAINST w. NORCROSS.
A writ of attachment in favor of w.
E. Tenney of Kansas City VS.. Webster
Norcross Of London, England, particu-
larry the goods in the possession OF Jos
eph IL. Norcross of Grafton, was record
ed at the register Of deeds, Saturday
the case being an action of contract
with an ad damnum Of $780, Dodge &
Tatt appear for the plaintiff.
JEWETT ALSO SUMMONED.
Deputy Sheriff David H. Hayter
served papers on John Fl. Jewett, the
business manager of the Gazette, Satur.
day, summoning him into court tomor-
row afternoon with David b. Rowland
in connection with the contempt case
The papers were given to Deputy Sheriff
Hayter to serve with those for Mr. How.
land, Friday, but he could not find Mr.
Jewett until yesterday.
CENTRAL DISTRICT COURT. UT.
LEY j. SATURDAY, JAN. 10.
Frank Goldberg, charged with violat-
ing city ordinance by purchasing arti.
cles from a minor, was discharged Il
was claimed that Goldberg bought a
pair of rubber boots from Arthur Schil.
Ter, who appears rather youthful. In.
spector Fisher said that Goldbere
showed the record on his books, which
showed that the boots were purchased
for $1.25, and the age of the man from
whom they were purchased as 26.
! Schiller said he had tried to dispose Of
the boots to another place but failing il
! the attempt, had sold the boots to Gold
/ berg for Is cents.
/ The defence tried to show that Rosen
thai, rival in business, was implicated
in the affair and had sent the boy tt
( -
! Goldberg into trouble. Judge Utley wa;
of the opinion that there was not sufh
4 cient evidence to hold Goldberg and HI
/ was discharged.
/ After the trial there was considerable
! excitement on Spring street, where thu
rival merchants do business. Goldberf
happened to see the young man whC
sold him the boots coming along thu
( street dressed in a new suit of clothes
! 1e ont Iai1 hO1 Of h ND .iaf
! to make him admit that the suit hat
I been given him by Rosenthal for making
| the complaint.
| The young man denied the implication
and during the argument that followed
Inspector Fisher came along and or
dered Goldberg to let the young man go
as he had done nothing for which he
could be held.
Nora Callahan was charged with lar.
ceny of so cents worth Of coal from the
railroad. Her case was placed on file
The DRINKS were: Dominick Ralph
house of correction, four months; Jas
Buckley, $40; and Peter Hughes, filed.
THE CIVIL SESSION.
]. P. Crosby and L. j. Goodell figured
in an interesting civil case in the dis
trict court, Saturday morning. Crosby
is the plaintiff, and sues to recover on
two promisSory notes, given by Goodell
one for $275 to the plaintiff in 1894 the
other for $115 to Gen Charles w. Wood
in 1897 Crosby purchased the Wood note
and now brings suit to recover on both
which, with accrued interest, amounts
to $3.50.
The defendant alleges that the plain
tiff owes him $3.50 for services in secur-
| ing his election as alternate to the re-
publican national convention at St
| Louis, and $3.50 for services in securing
his nomination ad election as represen-
tative to the general court in 1891 In the
| latter instance, the defendant claims
that his services were engaged by the
plaintiff in July previous to the caucus
and that he worked ga days at 81 a day
Crosby claims that he was not a can
didate until a few hours before the eau
Gus, and that Goodell was not engaged
| by him for any such purpose. Judge
Utley ruled against the $3.50 as being an
| outlaWed claim. Decision was reserved
Wood & Wood for the plaintiff; ID. b.
Hubbard for the defendant.
The case of Joseph Pokosafsky against
James Cotton was also tried. The plain
tiff claimed that there was balance OF
$20.61 due him for goods sold, including
a lot of collars. The defendant claimed
that although he purchased the goods
! an agreement was subsequently made
that the goods were to be paid for in in
stalments Decision reserved until next
Friday. Sullivan & O'Connell for plain
! tiff; Thayer & Rugg for defendant.
THE FUR CoMPANY's SCORE.