The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1900-03-28

expects to close today and the audi
tors counsel say they have no large
amount of rebuttal testimony to offer.
The proba abilities are that the case will
be in the jury's hands tomorrow.
Architec, Lacey. who went on the
stand last Thursday. was not relieved
from the verge of examination and
cross-examination until noon yester-
day.
At the afternoon session the Wit
nesses examined were a. T.. Hunt. of
the Hunt & Council company; Conrad
Schroeder, contractor: Max ZiZelman
and Frank Becker. foremen for Mr..
Schroeder and John Benorc. sub-cOn-
tractor.
Mr. Hunt was examined as to the
extra bill for gIs fitting. He admitted
| that he himself supposed the plumbing
| bid sent in by his firm included the
gas fitting. but his forcmen informed
| him differently. and after the gas tit
| ting had been done the foreman re-
ported he had done the work at the
| order of Architect Lacey.
ABOUT THE EXTRAS.
| Contractor Schroeder and his fore-
men gave testimony bearing on the
!
given credit all Of which was gone
| over previously by Architect Lacey.
| Mr.. Brnore was called tn testify as
| To his extra work. but AS he had no
| personal knowledge of The matter the
business having been attended to by
| his foremeu he was not questioned at
any length
| In explaining how it came that he
1 ~.
work on the roof Mr.. Schroeder made
the statement incidentally. that if the
old roof had not been removed il would
be doNn ON the sidewalk by this time.
| It had begun to spread and push out
| ON the sidewalks, and these walls. in
| some places. contained cracks SO wide
that the arm coulo, be inserted in the
| crevices the full length.
Y 1t was on this account mainly that
| the commissioners wanted some on =
tn take fun responsibility. and it was
this that prompted them t. engage
| Mr.. Schroeder.
| Judge Archibald Is engaged in trying
the trespass case of stuart Cutler. of
Green Ridge. "a gai inst the Scranton Rail-
way company. The plaintiff wants s.
900 damages for injuries which he nl-
Ieges resulted from his being forcefn l.
and wrongfully elected from a Provi-
icnce ear. at the corner of Green Rids
street and North Main avenue. IN
Christmas eve. 1897
There is no question but that he was
| elected and his election was fnrcihle
but the defendant holds that he was
| profane and boisternus and assaulted
| the conductor.
PLAINTIFFS SIDE. OF CASE.
| The plaintiff hopes to prove that even
If the election was warranted. ii was
not effected in a proper manner. II l.
| alleged the conductor threw him of
while the car was in motion.
In answer to this. the company con-
tends that Cutler and IA friend named
Lorelace attacked the conductor, B. T.
Marshall and that the conductor CAV
signal I" STOP but before the cal
could he brought to standstill tn,
struggle resulted in Cutler going head
first from the platform. I.ovelace was
put off after the car stopped.
The plaintiffs witnesses admit tha'
Cutler was evidentl: under the inflI
ence of drink. and that he act",
merry" The defense expects To shoN
that something more than mere merit.
ment characterized Cutters conduct.
The plaintiff is twenty-three years %
age and married. He claims he Wa.
| laid w for ten DAYS as "A result nf hi.
injuries and that his eyesieht and gen
eral constitution have been permanen;
ly impaired.
Attorneys George w Beale and J. II
Burns represent the plaintiff. Maio
Everett Warren appears for the com
pany.
, The case of Attorney ID. b. Replo8l,
against Arthur Frothineham is on be
fore Judg. Albright in M. >. Mr.. Rep
, logic sues for s,50c0 for false arr, 81
He and Mr.. Frothineham had som
, dispute over a note and Mr.. Froihing
, ham had him arrested for embezzle
ment. February 4, 1897. Alderman Mil
lar held him to bail and con.mitte;
him in default thereof, but Judye Gun
ster the next morning, released hin
on a habeas corpus. Mr.. Reploale /
cndeavoring To show that in the in
term between the transaction concern
ing the note and the time of the ar
rest Mr.. Frothinsham made an opcl
threat to have him disbarred.
James n. Torrey, Joseph O'Brien AM
Hon. G. p. OMallev are the plaintiff
attorneys. The defendant Is represent
ed by Attorneys T.. W. Thayer and II
II. Holgate.
VERDICT FOR MOVER.
In the case OF Frank Moyer agains
Morris Davidow. a verdict was entere
for The plaintiff in the sum of $3.50 ~