The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1901-12-10
TWO COURTS
IN SESSION
Jury and Jury Waived Sessions of
the Superior Civil Court Open
with Judges GaskiII and Akin
Presiding
LONG LIST OF CASES
PRESENTED IN EACH

iouS Dates and UtnerS MarKeu
for TriaI-The Usual Long List
of Divorce LibeIS Presented for
Decision
Judge John A. Aiken Of Greenfield
presided at the opening of the jury
waived session Of the Superior Court,
which occurred at 2.15 o'clock yester-
dav afternoon. Clerk w. w. Macomber
called the docket.
These cases were continued TO the
January term:
Northwestern Iron Company vs.Wor-
lcester Brewing Company ct ais; George
IA Stevens VS.. City of Worcester; Nor
ris Deutsch ct ais VS.. Frank II. Heron
ct ais; Lewis R, Speare ct ais VS.. Al
bert H. Chaffee; Lakeside Manufactur-
/ ing Company VS.. Leicester Water Sup
ply District; Yesabro Wooyeno ct ais
| vs.. James r Shaw william A. Wish
art VS.. Joseph Mcknight; ware
National Bank VS.. q. A Hubley ct ais
trustee; Gertrude NJ. Janzer VS.. John
Cowan; Charles R. Brown VS. Post
Publishing Company; City of Worces-
ter VS. inhabitants of town of Leices-
ter: Aron F. Jones VS.. Edward L. Hay
den: William Thompson VS.. city OF
Worcester; l. Wilson vs.. /. Goldberg;
/ Catherine E. O'Brien VS.. Philip T.
| O'Brien; John Enright VS.. American
Wooden Company; Charles L. Pratt ct
ais VS.. Grafton Electric Company; VIII
liam F. Hixon VS.. William Harris ana
trustee applicants; John X. James, ct
e Droepnff q u emf
/ ct ais; Calvin Miller VS.. Clinton z.
Harrington; Frank B. Pierce Homer
| NJ Parker; The F. A. Whitney Car
}riage Company VS.. Frederick A. Whit
ney ct al;Reuben Adams VS.. .Millbury
Savings Bank Michael A Henry, ad-
ministrator vs.. Frank H. Kelley and
trustee; Dwight P. Allen VS.. William
/ H. Inman.
| These cases were continued: limo
| thy Richardson ct ali VS.. The Clinton
| Wall Trunk Manufacturing Company
] ct ais; Carl G. Jacobson VS.. City of
3 Worcester; Della McInerny vs.. City of
Worcester; William O'Connel vs,City of
| Worcester; Mary H. RampO ct ali VS..
| City of Worcester; Henry Stead vs..
City of Worcester; William F. Hlxon
VS.. William Harris and trustee appli-
cants; Addie e. Knight VS. Horace f.
Cove: Mary Tobin, administrative VS..
Spencer Savings Bank.
! Edward L. BarrOws vs.. George A.
! Barrows both of Athol was the first
case heard.
! When Edgar L. Barrows came out of
! Charleston Prison August, 1891, after
serving a five years sentence, he found
! that his wife was divorced and had
married again, that his oldest daugh-
| ter had married, that the daughter who
| brought the charge which made him a
/ 81 40 hot aaya+z
| which he possessed before his conYic-
ton was held fast by George A. Bar
rows, his brother. Such was the story
related by s. P. Smith, counsel for
Barrows, who has brought a bill in
| equity against George A. Barrows tc
recover the estate.
The plaintiff claims that he decided to
| his brother a house and dwelling in
Athol worth $500, more or less, and
that he transferred to him money or
deposit amounting to more than $1,000
and a promissory note for 500, in re-
turn for which the plaintiff was to pro-
vide bail and proper defense for the
plaintiff which, the latter says he die
not do.
On May 9, 1897, the plaintiff was ar
rested charged with incest with his
/ youngest daughter. Within 10 days he
was convicted and received a sentence
Of five years. It was at this time the
transfers were alleged to have been
made.
The defendant admits receiving the
property substantially as alleged, but
says the plaintiff gave it to him to
keep it from Ella n. Barrows the
PLAINTIFFS wife. He did not promise to
| get bail for plaintiff, but did volunta-
rily furnish him with counsel
| The total amount Of property in
| volved IS $4,000 Judgment was given
| for plaintiff in a previous trial, and
motion for a new trial was granted on
| ground of newly discovered evidence.
! A motion for a temporary injunction
was denied in ]. Henry Pickett VS.
| Charles H. Dickinson, both of Temple