The leader., 1900-03-14
THE ICE FACTORY CASE.

THE ICE FACTORY CASE.
Chancellor Conn convened his court
in vacation here last Thursday to con-
tinue the trial of the Ice Factory case,
which consumed the time of the court
all of Thursday and Friday and result
ed in a Judgment adverse to the Ice
Company. \ summary of the points
in CONT. ersy will be. of interest to
Brook mites and these are given
below
EaI 1893 the Brookhaven Ice
Mfg. contracted with the Fred W.
Wolf Co., of Chicago, to put in Linde
ice making machine with capacity of
: tons per a hours of continuous oper
alton. In the contract the Fred w.
Wolf Co. guaranteed that the ice pro-
duced would be clear, merchantable
ice. The Brookhaven Ice Mfg. Co.
paid half the contract price for the
machine, $500, before the plant was
complete. The Wolf Co. undertook to
produce the temperature and make the
ice guaranteed, and while the plant
produced tons of ice in "a hours
when tested, the ice was not clear and
was infected with oil. This state of
affairs existed through the whole sea
son. On the 9th of July, days after
the whole plant was complete, the
Brookhaven Ice Mfg. Co. rejected the
plant and requested Wolf d Co. to take
it out of it's building, and in October
filed a suit in the Chancery Court to
require Wolf & Co. to pay back the
$500 and damages and take out the
machinery, claiming that the plant
would not produce the tons of ice
per day, and that what it did produce
was white, porous and oily and un
merchantable. The case consumed )
days in the trial, it having begun on
and the term expiring, by consent of
the parties another day was named to
try it. 1t was holly contested on both
sides. Messrs Cassidy & Cassidy and
a. &. McNair represented the Ice Co.,
Melville & Thompson represented the
Fred w. Wolf Co. and E. f. Brennan
the Commercial Bank, which was made
defendant, it having mortgage on
the property. The Chancellor found
that the ice contained oil in quaint
ties so large as to make it unmerchant-
able and that it was white and porous
and did not come up to the contract,
and that it was, in the main, the fault
of the machinery. But he decided
that the using the plant after the same
was rejected, operated as an ac-
ceptance and waiver of the defects
The question of law involved is
wheth er by keeping and using a piece
of machinery guaranteed to perform
certain work until the seller shall re-
move it, thereby diminishing the dam
age caused by breach of the warran-
ty, it would operate as an acceptance
The case was complicated in its de
tails, the testimony taking in the whole
art of ice-making, and it is possible
that some of the attorneys are still
bordering over thermal units" fol
lowing the condensed water" from the
well to the engine and wondering what
the qualifications are for an engineer
whose duty calls him to run ''sta-
tionary locomotive" An ice plant is
fearfully and wonderfully made, and
the product of this one was explained
by a witness when asked what kind of
ice it produced, as being "cold and
hard" and he supposed it was ice.
Pending the final adjudication of the
controversy by the Supreme Court,
Messrs. Heuck and Grafton. compos-
ing the Ice Factory Co., have decided
to resume operations for the season
and will have an expert engineer in
charge next week to give the machin-
cry thorough overhauling.