The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1899-10-30
CIR DOES NOT
WANT TO PAY.
WOOnSOCket Seeks TO Have La
porte Verdict Set Aside.
JURY AWARDED HIM $1,000.
He Was Injured BY Caye-in While at Work
for The City IN a Sewer Trench.
SUFFERING FROM BRlGHTS DISEASE.
Which He CLAIMS Was Brought on by Injuries.
Counsel for City Makes Long Argument
In Favor Of New Trial.
He Was Injured BY Caye-ln While at Work
for the City In a Sewer Trench.
SUFFERING FROM BRlGHTS DISEASE.

The most important question in the
case of Joseph Laporte of Woonsocket
against Samuel II. Cook, city treasurer
of the northern metropolis, heard by
the appellate court today on the de-
fendants petition for a new trial, was
whether Bright's disease can result
from an accident. City Solicitor France
claimed it could not and William q.
Rich argued that a jurys verdict gdv-
ing LaporIe $1,000 when he was not ex-
tensvely injured, was correct.
Laporte claimed damages resulting
from the caving in of a ditch on the
Diamond Hill road on June ?, 1896, in
which he was working for the city. La
porte had gone into the ditch to dig
bell holes, so as to give room for the
caulker to perform his work of tight
ening joints. While he was digging the
walls of the ditch. which was six feet
deep, caved in and he was injured in
ternally, he claims. The city Of Woon-
socket, il is alleged, was negligent in
not furnishing the plaintiff with safe
place 10 work
NON-SUIT SET ASIDE.
The case was first tried before Judge
Bosworth, who non-suited the plain
tiff. The appellate court granted a new
trial and "A jury in Judge Dubois-eaurt
gave the plaintiff a verdict for $4,000.
The defendant petitions for new
trial upon the following grounds
That evidence of the extreme poverty
and financial condition OF the plaintiff
was admitted To which evidence de-
fendant objected.
That the verdict is against the evil
dence and the weight thereof.
That tho verdict Is against the law.
That the plaintiff did not prove that
the damages were the direct result of
the injury.
That the damages were excessive.
That the defendant has not had full.
fair and impartial trial i'm the case and
a new trial should be had thereon.
city Solicitor France OF Woonsocket
argueN that evidence of the financial
condition OF the plaintiff was entirely
irrelevant and there was an artful ef-
fort 10 keep the poverty before the jury
and ii had strong tendency TO preju-
dice the jury i'm the plaintiffs favor
t-Afr--F'rarcc- Safd-wt1er extreme
weakness Of the plaintiffs case as a
matter Of law and fact was taken into
consideration the conclusion is irresis-
tible that the verdict was due 10 senti-
ment.
BURDEN ON PLAINTIFF.
He further urged that the plaintiff
was bound TO prove that the city Of
Woonsocket failed to provide suitable
appliances for and materials sor shor-
ing up the ditch; that the plaintiff had
a knowledge of facts upon which
proper appreciation of the risks may
have depended: that Ht was necessary
TO shore up a ditch Of this depth con-
sidering the fact il was virgin soil con-
sisting OF gravel sand and loan; that
plaintiff exercised due care and that
he was injured at this time.
Mr.. France claimed the testimony OF
physicians called in the case is that
Brights disease is a disease that affects
the internal construction OF the kidneys
and is not caused by external injuries
to them.