The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1898-02-08
THE COURT

of W. f. Worth vs. I. j. Ferguson and II.
ID. Shutt-The Result of This Case Gov
ems five Other Suits Instituted Against
the Same Defendants-The Case Appealed
Nearly the entire time of the superior
court yesterday was consumed by trial
of the numerous cases against T. j.. Fer
guson. of this city, and H. D. Shut, of
Winston.
T. J. Ferguson is we'll remembered as
the proprietor of the Atlas House. on
Wrightsville beach, When in charge Of
this scuse which was during last sum-
mer, he contracted bills with the ice fac
tory of Mr.. w. E. Worth, the brewery
in charge of Mr.. Louis We'll, the bakery
of Mr.. w. A. Farriss, the grocery houses
of Mr.. S. w Sanders and The JOhn l..
Boatwright Company, and when he clos
ed the house for the season he failed to
pay these bills. His creditors then
brought suit against him and Mr.. Henry
D. Shut, of Winston, ar alleged partner
i'm the hotel business with Ferguson.
These suits were brought in the courts
of Justices Bunting, MCGOWAN and Fow-
Ter, and then carried up to the superior
court. Later, a suit was brought in JUS
tice McGowan's court against Ferguson
and Shutt by Giles Carmen, who sued
for cooks wages, and this suit, too, was
taken up Ito the higher court.
The defendant Shut claims he was not
a partner in the business; that he loan
ed Ferguson money to start the hotel,
under contract that Ferguson was to pay
THE money back ON a certain day, and in
lieu of interest pay to him one-hlalf of the
profits.
The suits instituted against Ferguson
and Shutt were called about an hour af-
ter the converting of court. l.. NJ. Swink,
Esq, of Winston, and John D. Bellamy,
Esq, and Geo. L. Peschau, Esq, repre-
scented the defendants, and E. K. Bryan,
Esq, and A. ]. Marshall, Esq, appeared
for the plaintiffs.
The suit instituted by Mr.. w. E. Worth
was first called, and counsel representing
both sides decided to let the resHlt of
that suit govern THE other suits.
The following jury was empanneiled:
J. B. Hand, NJ. G. Chadwick, r. G..
Holmes, Chas. Carter, w. j. Clemmons,
William Brown, T. A. Mckenzie. B. ].
kulkeT, Mel. Loftin, Robert Dosher,
William Turley and O. Mckinney.
The first witness called was Mr.. Worth,
who testified to the Indebtedness of Fer
guson to him, but stated that he did not
know Shut in the transaction.
Mr.. Ferguson was placed or the stand
and testified as to the agreement between
him and Shut.
Mr.. w. A. Farriss testified that Shut
told him that he (Shutt) was in partner
ship with Ferguson.
Mr.. S. w. Sanders testified chat Shut
made a similar declaration to him.
Mr.. Shut was called and testified as
to the agreement between him and Fer
guson.
The contract of agreement between
Ferguson and Shut was then placed in
evidence.
After this Mr.. Bellamy, representing
the defence, demurred to the evidence,
under the acts of 1897, chapter 100.
The jury was then sent out of court
and argument on the demurrer heard.
This argument consumed several hours
and was participated in by all the coun-
sci.
Upon the conclusion, the court overrul-
Ell UIe IuOllOlE dIfu ClIc dclclrCc cACtplcu
to the ruling.
Messrs. Bryan and Marshall then NOV
ed for judgment in the case, which was
granted by Judge Adams. the amount
being s94 and interest on same from abou
last July.
The defendant then appealed the case
to the supreme court. Notice of the APP
peal was waived and the bond fixed at
So. Thirty days were allowed the de-
PENDANT to file case on appeal and thirty
days thereafter were allowed the plain
tiffs to file counter statement.
Cour about $50 O'Clock took a recess
until 10 O'Clock this morning.
THE SUIT AGAINST DIR. BLUE
MOUNTAIN JOE.
The appeal case Of Harry Schwalbe VS..
DIR. Blue Mountain Joe, suit brought by
the Plaintiff TO recover wages of his
hand which played for DIR. Blue Noun
tain Joe, was taken up early during the
morning session.
The case is one appealed from Justice
McGowan's court, IN which court the
Plaintiffs were given Judgment.
John D. Beilamy, Esq, moved, on be-
half Of the plaintiff, to dismiss the case.
His motion was oyerruled and the case
was continued
OTHER CASES DISPOSED OF.
Armour Packing Company vs.. w.
Williams. et al. Motion Of plaintiff TO
annul is denied. Motion OF de-
fendans TO dismiss is overruled.
W. E Worth, receiver. VS.. E. P. whar-
ton. Demurrer Of defendant is overruled