The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-09-21

In tne matter Oh eNnlDllS, tHe CoSS
of the Lacoe and Shiffer Coal company
against w. M. Springer is a record
breaker. At 3 o'clock yesterday after
noon, when adjournment was had,
Stenographer Willis ID. Coston was en-
gagged in marking for identiication
plaintiffs Exhibit No. S.
This large number of papers entering
into the case are the deeds from the
time of the commonwealth grant in
1850 until the present, by which the
coal company is endeavoring to estab-
lish it's paper title. All of Monday af-
ternoon and yesterday was taken up
with the presentation of these "eX-
hibits" and the last is not yet COM
plete.
1t looked for a time yesterday as If
third jury would have to be empanelled
in this case. On Monday, it will be
remembered, Charles Stoner, of Scran-
ton. one of the first jury drawn, be-
came i'll after the case had been opened
for the plaintiff necessitating. the
drawing of another jury and repeti-
ton Of the plaintiffs opening. Yester-
day when court reconvened after the
noon recess one of the jurors, Thomas
Gordon, of Carbondale, was missing.
GORDON APPEAltED.
After a. tedious, and on the plaintiffs
part, an anxious wait, of nearly an
hour, Gordon put in an appearance
and took his seat in the box after eX
planning that he was taken suddenly
i'll at dinner. The case had proceeded
but short time when Gordon gave
signs of being i'll again, and not wish
ing to go on with the case under this
condition of affairs, adjournment was
agreed upon until this morning. Judge
Edwards told Gordon that he had bet
ter recover from his illness over night
and be on hand in the morning.
The case of f. j. Ehrgood against
the Moscow Water company is still on
before Judge Love. The defense was
opened during the afternoon by Mr..
O'Brien, who said It would be shown
that the company in no way decreased
the flow of the stream that supplied
Ehrgood's mill; that for years before
the water company tapped the stream
the mill was periodically idle because
of the lack of water, and that the
building of the company's dam made no
noticeable change in the flow of the
stream or in the operations of the mill.
charles Lancaster, who leased the mill
subsequent to the building of the COM
pany's dam, and a number of other
residents of Moscow gave testimony
along the line of Mr.. O'Brien's state
ment.
In the case of Kane & Timony
against Fred Dewitt and others. a
claim for plastering work and mater
iaIs, the jury found for the plaintiffs
in the sum of $3.50, which is $40 less
than the full amount of the claim.
REPLOGLE CASE.
The only new case called Yesterday
was that of d. p. Replogle, assigned
to David T. Williams. against William
&. Carey and his wife, Agnes Carey.
1t is a dispute growing out of dealings
the defendants had with Mr.. Replogle
AS attorney. When they came togeth-
er in 1896 to effect a settlement the
defendants confessed judgment in
favor of the plaintiff for $3.50 They
afterwards repudiated the judgment
alleging that they did not know what
they were signing.
The case teemed with allegations oi
sharp practices and the like, but Judge
Gunster ruled that they had no direct
bearing on the case at issue and gave
Dlndlng instructions to the jury to i1no
in favor of the plaintiff because of q
lack of a sufficient defense.
c. w. Carpenter and G. f. Oliver
represented the plaintiff and II. w
Mullholland the defendant.
The case of Emily C. Rhule agains
the Diamond Colliery Accidental Fund
was referred to II. c. Reynolds
In the case of the Delaware, Lacka
wanna and Western Railroad compan!
against H. w. Hull judgment by agree
nlent was entered for the plaintiff il
the sum of $7244..
Judgment for S25 in favor of TIL,
plaintiff was entered by agreement il
the case of Austin Muffley agains
Anna Haslam and the Haslam Linz
company. There was an accompany
ing proviso that execution should b.
stayed for thirty days.
Rules for nterpleaders were mad
absolute in the cases of Clark Lowr,
against Harry Depuy, and S. c. Whit
man agai = Louis Boyer & Sons an,
others.