Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1901-04-03
LAW COURT DECISIONS.

me Following rescripts have been
handed down from the law court:
, Nhox, IS. Inhabitants of South
Ihomaston VS.. Inhabitants of Friend
ship. Rescript:
III an action by one town against an
other TO recover for supplies furnished
one watson and family, pauper
WHOSE settlement was alleged to be in
inc defendant town, the declaration
aVerred, that on the first day of Feb
lazy, "A. D.. 1895, said Watson, and
with him his family, had and ever
since has had his lawful settlement in
tie town OF Friendship; that on the
hFst day OF February aforesaid, the
sad watson, so having his settlement
III said town of Friendship, was found
III said town of South Thomaston des-
htute and on account of poverty in
need OF relief. and, being so found, the
oNeFseers OF the poor OF said town of
South Thomaston relieved said Watson
and his said family, by then and there,
ard thence to the day of the date, of
this writ, furnishing and providing
them with sufficient board, etc, men
toned in the account annexed to the
writ; and within three months next
after the furnishing of the said sup
plies. to wit on the said day of --
-, 1896, the oxerscerS of South
Thomaston. sent written notice,
signed by them. to the overseers of the
poor of the town of Friendship stat
ing therein the facts
The presiding justice allowed the
plaintiit to amend the declaration by
inserting after the words. land on the
first day of February, aforesaid" the
words, and on Sundry days suisse
quent thereto and by inserting after
the clause. and the plaintiff ayers
that within three months next after
the furnishing of supplies aforesaid, :"
the words. and on the 9th day of
April. 1887" and by striking out at
said place the words, ION the
day of , 1885,
Held. that said amendments were
properly allowed in the discretion of
the court.
a plaintiff may be allowed in the dis
erection of the court to amend his
declaration by striking out any por-
ton of the claim sued.
1t is not necessary in order to retain
hio S,sti hoiiic III a "" II tilel ii fbtISOii
should at all times have some house,
or building, or room, to which he has
right 10 so.
The defendant requested the pre-
siding justice to in"truct the jury that
a home once established continues I'M
til the person departs with an inten-
ton TO abandon such home. The pre-
siding justice did not give the instruc-
ton as requested, but instructed the
jury that to break up the continuity of
a home it is not necessary that the de-
parture should be with fixed inten-
ton to return.
Held, that the instruction given is
correct.
In a pauper suit the burden is upon
the party alleging it to prove that the
pauper has gained a new settlement by
having a home five years conaecutively
in some other town.
1t is possible that Il man may so
wander around as to lose a home with
in the legal Specification of the word
home under the pauper statutes.
Exceptions overruled. Judgment on
the verdict.
SagadahOc, SIS. New Bedford Copper
Co, VS.. Charles II. T. ]. Southland. Re
script.
In February, 1898. the plaintiff and
the defendant made contract BY
which the plaintiff agreed to furnish
the defendant a suit of metal to be
delivered in New York about last
May or June" for Il ship to be due at
that point about April
Held, that time of performance of Il
contract, when fixed by the parties, is
an essential element of the contract.
Held. further, that by the contract
above recited, the plaintiff was requir-
ed to furnish the metal by the last day
of June, unless the ship should be de-
layed on her voyage, in which case the
plaintiff should deliver the metal with
in Il reasonable time after her arrival,
though such reasonable time should
extend beyond the month of June.
The ship arrived in New York, April
p. 1885, and lay in that port till July I.
1899. The defendant did not demand
for or call for the metal until Febru-
airy, 1899, when the price of metal had
advanced five cents per pound.
Hold that the metal was not called
for within the time provided by the
contract, ana that the nldlhtlIE was
thereby absolvcd from liability under
the contract.
The metal, for the price of which this
action is brought was furnished under
a new contract made in May. 1899. and
the defendant must pay the price
stipulated in the new contract.
Judgment for plaintiff for three thou
sand, three hundred and twenty dol
lars and eightysiN cents Cs3,32O So
with interest from July IA, 1899.