Daily Kennebec journal., 1901-12-14
THE LAW COURT.
Arguments in Celebrated Case
Cote VS.. Biddeford.
tx-Judge Foster for Plaintiff and Ex-
Governor CIeaves for Defence.
Two kennebec County Cases Argued. Friday.
Piscataquis County Rescript.

W important question was argued
Friday. before the law court. arising
unuer the act of the LEGISLATURE passed
IL 1899, establishing Il board of police
for the city Of Biddeford The parties
4 I" the action are Daniel Cote and the
, city Of Biddefor,l
1t appears that on the first day of
July, 1882, the board of police of the
city Of Eiddeford removed Mr.. Cote
from the Office of city marshal, ap-
| pointed Charles Il. Harmon in his
stead. amt installed him in office as
city marshal.
Ex-Judge Enoch Foster of Portland
who appeared for the plaintiff. claimed
that the action of the board was Illegal
and that Mr.. Cote had since continued
I" be the legal city marshal of Bidde-
/ ford. claiming the office and was en-
| titled to the salary and emoluments at
| taChed to the same.
Ex-Governor Henry b. Cleaves If
portland, who appeared as counsel for
the city of Eidd-ford argued that the
plaintiff had abandoned all right to the
Office and its eniolumenis and relieved
the city from any duty to pay him IL
/ salary. Governor cleaNeS further ar
gued, as Il matter Of law that if th.
plaintiff had it in his power to be rein
, stated by proper proceedings and he
made no effort for six years To that end.
| but submitted TO the removal. tn. in
ference is inevitable that he waived his
right "a the office and to the salary
during that period; that the plaintiff
instead Of asserting his legal rights
before Il competent tribunal. engaged
hey nlI.SilitS and Ar ~ i'm.
formed the duties of the Office that ut
Eu time did he offer himself for ser
Vice to the police department or re-
quest to be placed on duty. or claim
any salary; that while. he claimed that
his removal was unlawful, he never
Went so far as to ask to be reinstated:
auG the conclusion is irresistible thai
H., gave up All claim to the office ana
lis salary and cannot now maintain
this action.
At the last September term Of the |
supreme judicial court for York coun-
Il ut Alfred the jury returned q YER |
dict for $S+i for Mr.. Cote.
Two kennebec county eases We're ar |
eued. these OF Mrs. Harriet l.. Kit
tr-dge vs. the Maine water 90. ana |
Morgan vs.. the estate Of sumner G. Me |
Cuuslund deceased. Al the last term |
OF the October supreme judicial court
al Augusta. Justice WhitehouSe pre-
siding, in the iirSt case verdict was
render ed for the plaintiff for $30Sl5 for
injuries caused by stumbling over i cap /
to a shut -Cn pipe, dislocating the wrist 1
ot the defendant, due, il is alleged. to H
me negligence Of the defendant COM 1
pany Hon A. NJ Spear for the de
fence argued that the defect was not
a Il cal one. While Hon. George w. Hes
elton argued that il was legal defect.
The Morgan ~. McCausland case was
argued on the question Of pleadings by
Hon. II. Vi Heath for the defendant
ara Hon. A. NJ. Spear for the plaintiff,
The case of Walter 4. King vs. the
kennebec Light x Heat 90, at the July
term at Portland. At the September
term Of the supreme court fur Lincoln
county a verdict was rendered for the
plaintiff for sll lot. 80 for injuries caused
by the plaintiff coming in contact with
a. live wire while employed as a porter
at tn Evans house at Gardner due.
II * alleged to the negligence of the
defendant company.
4 rescript was handed down. Fri
day. in the Piscataquis county case OF
NJ. G. Shaw in equity vs.. the Monson,
Maine slate Company and others. as
follows.
First-A creditors bill under Chap
ter ~. Section g. Paragraph of the
Revised Statutes is not the proper pro-
cess for a pledge to enforce his claim
A against the pledgeor and the property
pledge. Second-Under the equity pro-
tedure. act of Chapter q. Section 10 OF
the Revised Statutes. a case should not
he reported to the law court until the
pleadings have been completed with all
necessary amendments and the evil
dence taken out: and not even then,
unless the decision of the law court
upon the. duestiO ions of law involved VIII
determine the case without
further amendment or proceedings
Third-While the court has fuil dis
,retionary power to allow amendments. |
10 equity pleadingS at any time. ana |
vil, exercise that power at any stage |
of tha case upon reasonable terms. or |
even without terms if necessary for the !
presentation of some substantial right, |
Il viii not ordinarily allow amendments |
IN IN. bill after the case has been re- |
nor,ed 10 the law court. If the bill can |
not then be sustained without further |
amendment ii will ordinarily ht ms |