The Somerset reporter., 1899-10-12

FULLER, j., ffeSutHg
N. W. BRAiNERD, Clerk.
CHARLES o. SMALL, County Attorney.
GEORGE Fl. COLLINS, Stenogrd pher
F. P. PENSELL, Sheriff.
CHESTER II. MILLS, Messenger.
DEpuTIss:-wm. F. Mutt. Fairfield; F. L.
Harding, Madison; S. w. Herrick, Harmony
C. b. Haskell, Plttsfeld; F. s. Parsons, No.
Arson; r. S. Williams, Hartland. Hiram Nj.
Waugh, Starks; Charles F. Ham, Bingham S.
S. Walker, North New Portland Cornelius A.
Merrill Scion; Calvin Il JONES' Athens; b. f.
Jones, So. Norridgewock. w. Guy Pennell.
Skowhegan.
Friday afternoon the jury brought in
verdict for the defendant in the thrice
tried case Amini A. Brooks VS.. Lew
ellyn Morrill,.
Friday afternoon trial of the case,
Samuel K. Smith VS., Inhabitants of
the town of Skowhegan was entered
upon. E.. N. Merrill for the plaintiff,
S. j. Walton and A. K Butler, town
agent, for the defendants. The action
was brought to recover damage to the
land of the plaintiff caused by the lay.
ing out of highway known as the Elk.
tension of Jewett street, from Madison
avenue to the trotting park, strip of
land 20 rods long and about u rods
wide. This highway was laid out by
the town in February 1899, and was &C.
cepted at the annual March meeting,
and no damages were awarded by the
selectmen and none voted by the town
The damage in the writ was placed at
81, 900. The defense claimed that the
plaintiff claimed more land than actually
would be taken fl ON his land, that the
convenience of several men who had
built houses fronting upon the right of
way held by the Somerset Central Agri-
cultural Society from Madison avenue
to their fair grounds, required the build
ing of this road, that it had been asked
for by these householders before and
therefore public necessity required the
highway, but the town had not made
provision for damages. The jury took
Somerset Traction car and visited the
premises, Friday afternoon. The jury
returned a verdict, Saturday, in favor of
the plaintiff for $4,000
The case Sarah A. Abbey VS. Abel G..
Stevens occupied the attention of the
court, saturday afternoon and Monday.
Both plaintiff and defendant in this case
were residents of Scion, and action was
brought by plaintiff for damages sus-
tanned by her on account of alleged
defamatory words uttered against her
by the defendant. In defense it was
stated that the words as alleged were
not uttered by him, and that If uttered
they were true A large number of
witnesses were examined on each side.
The result of the trial was verdict for
the plaintiff for 1870 90. G. w. Cover
for the plaintiff. T j. Young and S.
W. Gould for the defendant.
William Howard was arraigned and
fined $4,000 and costs as a common
seller; also $50 90 and costs for single
sale.
James Head was arraigned and fined
$50 90 and costs for single sale.
The criminal trial docket was taken up,
Tuesday morning.
The first case was that of the State
vs. Frank D. Sweenie upon an indict-
ment for forgery County Attorney
Small appeared for the State and f. N.
Merrill Esq for the defendant. There
were two cases against the respondent,
each one of two counts. The accused
was tried on both cases before different
juries. The first count in the first case
was for forging the name of b Frank
Burns to a check of SOL co. The second
CONT was for uttering or passing this
check. The witnesses called were Mr..
and Mrs. b. Frank Burns and Hon. A.
g. Blunt. 1t appeared by the evidence
that the defendent was at work for b
Frank Burns, a well known farmer in
Madison, that he got access to Mr..
Burns bank book and tore therefrom
two blank checks, that he made out this
one in question for SOL co. and succeed
ed in passing it on A. g. Blunt in the
purchase of bicycle, receiving the
wheel and the balance in cash. The
defense made was a technical one
as to the insufficiency of the indictment
in that it did not properly describe the
bank check. The counsel for the de-
Tense also made the point that the paper
alleged to be forgery was not a legal
document because the revenue stamp it
bore was not cancelled by him, it being
simply cancelled by the dating stamp
when it was received in the bank the
next day, August 14th, and according to
the provisions of the U. S. law relating
to such revenue stamps, it could not be
used as evidence in any court. The
court admitted the check as evidence,
subject to the objections and exceptions
of the defendants counsel, and the case
was submitted without argument of the
county attorney or the counsel for de
Tense. The court gave the case to the
jury in a brief charge, and the jury
promptly returned a verdict of guilty on
both counts.
The second trial of Frank d. Sweenie
was for the forging and uttering of
check bearing the same signature as in
the former case for the sum of $32 90,
which was passed upon Ira A. Norton
The counsel were the same as in the
other case. The witnesses were Mr.. and
Mrs. B. Frank Burns and Ira A. Norton.
The counsel for the defense raised the
same formal objection to the indictment
and to the check, which in this case had
no revenue stamp thereon. The jury
brought in verdict of guilty on both
counts.
State vs. Daniel McAllister. Three
indictments were pending against this
de endant found by the grand jury at
the present term, and on Tuesday he
was tried for assault and battery upon
one George Brown of Embden. The
jury rendered verdict of guilty.
He was also tried upon the indictment
of adultery and the jury found him
guilty. County Attorney Small appear
ed for the State, and Walton & Walton
for the defense in the first case and For
rest Goodwin, Esq, for the defense in
the second case.
There remains the Indictment for
breaking and entering and larceny
against McAllister, upon which he will
probably be arCaigned today or tomor-