Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1899-03-02

A VERDICT FOR $4,000.
Result of the Damage Ease of hIcAieer VS..
isiuinenthai 81 Co..-The Jury Did Not De-
Iibernte I,png.

Result of the Damage Ease of McAIeer VS..
Biuinenthai 81 Co., The Jury Did Not De-
Iiberatc Long.
The trial of the sl5,00 damage suit
of Charles Il. Meal leer vs.. Il. Blumen-
thai a. CO., for the loss of an eye, was
resumed in the Superior Court Thurs
day morning.
Darby Tougher, who was q carpenter
at Blumenthal's, testified that the cir
cular saw and its frame work shook
from the jar of tho floor. When the
saw was much higher than tho piece of
wood to be sawed there was likely to
be more danger He maintained that
the gauge of the machine was on the
wrong side. the left. On cross-exami-
nation, Tougher said that the guard
was over the machine and could have
been usod.
j Nathaniel L. Henderson, an engineer
on the Maryland division, said he had
used circular saws Mt tho car shops.
In his opinion, the gauge of the ma
chino III court was on the wrong side.
At the car shops a notice is posted over
circular saws forbidding their use by
any but experienced hands. Such n
machine ns that in court would not be
allowed in the car shops.
machinists at the Pullman Palace car
works, who has had ~ years. expert
ence with circular saws, proved a
strong witness for the plaintiff. He
held the machine to be defective, and
said he would not run such a machine.
A question being asked as to the height
Of the saw from the table, the witness
measured it with rule furnished by
| Chief Justice Lore. twas 234 inches.
| He would not have such a saw in his
shop. With speed of 5000 revolu-
tions minute, he estimated that the
saw could throw board 30 yards. He
would not work such saw with a
guard, for the guard might hit you.
| He had seen saw throw board and
knock board off.
Stephen Downey, the milwright, who
has had long experience with circular
saws, declared the saw to be dangerous
all over.
George G. Mathiesson and Thomas
Sainworth, experienced men, also testi
fed as to what they considered bad
features of the saw.
Amos J. Brinton, usher Of the court,
testified that he was a millwright and
patternmaker by trade, and operated
circular gaws between 1847 and 1876.
He thought the saw in court might dc
for saving rails in Blackbird forest,
with careful hands. He would as leave
shovel powder with an iron shovel as
operate that machine. He said he was
born left handed and consequently the
machine would be ali right for that,
except he had learned to use right
handed machines because the gauge is
mostly set on the right hand. He haC
made frames for saws.
Alfred j. Anderson, plumber at thu
Blumenthal factory, testified that hi
asked Joe Ward for a man to saw
wooden plugs and Ward sent McAleel
toyhim.. He told McAleer what h,
wanted done.
Upon the application of Andrew G
Gray, E. r. Cochran, Jr., was ap
pointed commissioned to take testi
monyin the divorce case of John W
Valleau VS.. Kate Falleau.
Rules for writ of possession wer
made absolute in the cases of Eliza
beth w. Mendinhall VS.. James A. Ben
son, and Clara Miller VS.. Gallagher.
Adjournment was taken until
! o'clock.
, The defence put in all its testimon
Thursday afternoon in the Sl5, 90
! damage suit OF Charles f. McAleer VS.
, F. Blumenthal & Co., the damage
being sought for the loss of an eye, tn
I sight of which was destroyed by
: splinter. The defence held that Nc
i Aleer was never employed except as
carpenter, was warned about the ma
6 chine being dangerous, and never los
Z day on account If the accident. VII
:. liam f. Robinson, clerk at Blu
: menthal's, Adam Herdrich, the time
! Ial,na 4 :, te,i
n Joseph +. Ward, who had been hos
= millwright, and Richard Patzowsky
\ manager Of tho works, were the vii
g : nesses Herdrich said he posted
. warning near the saw. Ward said h
), explained the danger of the machin
= to McAleer. After the accident he sai
:, that McAleer said he had seen tn
: SPLINTER hanging down but did NJ
: think it would fly off and hit hin
\, Had tho guard been down the splintt
. would not have hit him.
,s After both sides had rested the a
torneys presented their prayers to tt
II court.
v Tho argument to the jury was mao
4 Friday morning Robert G. IIarman, fl
" the plaintiff, asked for Sl5, 900 damage
!. the amount claimed in the declaration
II LEONARD Il. Wales and j. III. Hotfecke
le Jr., for the defence, argued that M
I'd Aleer had shown contributory neel
% gence and should not recover. III
" closing speech for McAleer was mac
n by Austin Harrington.
is Since Thursday afternoons sessic
,e the saw had been removed from ii
"a court room. 1t had not been put
evidence. Mr.. Harrington began
10 comment on the removal of the m
"a chine, when Mr.. Wales objected rs
n. had been removed with Mr.. Harm
ne TOMS consent. The court said he mu
Nv not comment on ITS removal.
ly The case went to the Jury about
ed O'Clock on the charge of Chief Justi
ne Lore.
la After being out about three-quarte
nv of nm hour the Jury returned with
no verdict of 1900 in favor of McAlee
Il. A jury was drawn to try the case
nd Buker VS.. Carroll, involving the que
ed tion If the delivery of deed in Isl
Martin b. Burris represents the plai
al tiff and John FL. Rodney the defendar
Is. Announcement was made of the ST
re- tlement of the case of Dennis j. Ment
On VS.. Baltimore IL Philadelphia Railro
Al | IN Tho. suit grew oilt of the bt1ildi