The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1899-10-03
First Sitting at the
New Court House
Held Yesterday,
THE DOCKET CONTAINS 81 CASES
Arguments in An Appeal of
the Kettle Brook Gases
Took Up Much Time.

The October term of the supreme jul
dicial court opened yesterday morning
in the new criminal court room at the
court house. The sitting was the first
judicial session to be held in the new
building, and that added especial in
terest to the occasion.
The unusually chilly day was felt in
the court room. and until about noon
overcoats were worn. Later in the day
more steam was turned on, and the
room became warm enough for COM
fort. I
Chief Justice Holmes and the asso-
ciate justices, Knowlton, Lathrop, Bar
ker and Loring, were escorted in at 10
o'clock by Sheriff r. H. Chamberlain
and Court Crier Charles Sibley, for so
many years occupying that position,
made the usual proclamation of the OPP
ening of the court.
The prayer was made by the Rev
Frank L. Phelan. The attendance of
lawyers was large, and for some time
halls and corridors were we'll filled by
members of the bar interchanging the
gossip of the day, and talking over the
cases on the supreme court docket.
The docket, containing "a cases, was
first read and disposed of, either by
being submitted on briefs or else be-
ing set for argument. Five cases were
heard yesterday, and as many cases are
submitted. The prospect is that there
viii be an adjournment by Thursday.
The most important case to be heard
was the city of Worcester VS.. Lakeside
Manufacturing Company. This is one
of the famous Kettle brook cases,
which took so much time in the hear
ing before the board of referees. IL
came before the supreme court on an
appeal on the part of the defendants
from the decision of the lower court IN
q bill in equity brought to restrain the
defendant from prosecuting petition
for damages, filed in the superior court
May %, 1898.
1t came before the full bench of the
supreme court on exceptions and APP
peal from a decree of a single justice
Of the lower court sitting in equity, and
on the exclusion of certain evidence
sought to be introduced by the defend
ant. City Solicitor Rugg and W. s.
B. Hopkins appeared for the plaintiff,
and Rice, King & Rice for the Lake
side Manufacturing Company
The briefs of both sides were volu-
minous and the law points considered
were many. There was no dispute
various mill sites and property on ket-
tie brook, by the law of eminent do
main, but the defendants have claimed
that in the award of damages, the
board of referees did not consider the
value of the water for motive power,
and they sought to recover damages
on that point, besides the $4,000 award
ed by the Bennett referees.
First, there was a petition filed IN the
superior court, which was thereafter
discontinued, and the plaintiffs filed in
the superior court their objections to
this discontinuance, and also a special
plea and demurrer in the matter of the
second petition of defendant, filed May
%, 1888 w. S. B. Hopkins in his ar
gument brought out certain facts in
connection with the Kettle brook cases
that had come out while he was city
solicitor The arguments of both sides
took up the entire morning.
The case of Harriette F. Nevens VS..
inhabitants Of the city OF Fitehpurg'
came up next. Edward P. Pierce ap-
reared for the city of Fitchburg and
Charles f. Ware and W. S. B. Hopkins
for the plaintiff.
The Peoples Savings Bank VS.. Frank
NJ Heath was argued, with Frederick
j. Barnard for the bank and Alfred s.
Pinkerton for the defendant.
The case of William B. Han ding, as
signee VS.. Joseph Lewenberg, was ar
gued by Henry Parker for the plaintiff
and William C. Mellish for the defend
ant.
Several interesting points were
brought out in the case of Ohannes
Aslanian VS.. Hagcp Dostumian ct al.
George S. Taft and w. S. B. Hopkins
made arguments for the defendants
and Jere r. Kane for the plaintiff. The
case involved the laws regarding the
protesting of foreign note or draft.
In the case at bar. draft was drawn
on parties in Turkey and the custom
of law merchant" so-called, was gone
fully into by both sides. The question
came In, whether the law of Turkey
or of Massachusetts would apply, and
numerous cases were cited bearing on
that point.
The cases that have been submitted on
briefs are as follows: Commonwealth
VS.. Edward Welsh; Ferdinand ]. Libby
VS.. inhabitants of the town of Douglas;
John Green VS.. Francis A Gaskill, ex-
ecutor. ct tr. ct al; George H. Muller
VS.. Orrin J. Powers; Carl Frederickson
vs. Clinton Wall Trunk Manufacturing
Company; Frank H. Kelly VS.. William
S. Barton, collector, ct ais: William j.
Harnois VS.. George H. Cutting ct ais;
Julia E. Osborn VS.. Thomas S. Osborn;
Eliot T. Smith VS.. Thomas E. Condor.
The other cases will be argued in their
turn.
In the registry of deeds yesterday
en- important foreign will was filed,
that of John Webb of New York city.
Elisha Webb of North Brookfield and
J. Henry Woods of Brookline are named
as executors. The will was allowed in
the surrogate's court in New York be-
fore being filed here for probate. The
will makes q number of large requests.
Two brothers get $4,000 each, two
nieces get $4,000 apiece and a nephew
receives $4,000, The net annual rent
from a valuable piece Of property in
New York is equally divided for life
between the brothers and nephew, j.
Henry Woods, until the death of the
sold and the proceeds go to the heirs
and their heirs. All the residue, after
the brothers and the nephew named
before in the will.
James F. Briefly filed a petition to be
appointed administrator of the estate of
Annie B. Hatch.
Rufus P. Boynton, adjudge insane,
has filed petition for the removal of
his guardian, as he now considers him
self capable of managing his affairs.
The will of Edward L. Burnham of
Westminster was filed, with only small
bequests
Through her counsel James F. Nc
Govern, Catharine Haggerty has filed
a petition in the superior court asking