Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1902-01-11

edged by the defendant by letter of
March 8, 1899, which also stated that
-. receipt of the telegraph order he
had ''telegraphed' to the works ut
Cleveland, Ohio, to Immediately ship
the bucket and therefore it left that
day
the evidence shows that the bucket
was loaded on Pennsylvania Railroad
Co. car at Cleveland, Ohio, for ship
ment. March 4. 1899. but that it did not
arrive at Waterville until March "a,
1899.
on April l, 1899, the plaintiffs, by let
ter, notified the defendant that the
bucket. which they had been informed
by the American Express agent had
arrived. was of no use to them, as with
the delay they We're unable to use it.
and that they could not accept it, and
requested him to return the 500 which
he had received March g. 1899.
The legal character of the tranSac-
ton between the parties is to be deter
mined principally by the documents in
the report.
The letter head and business notices
printed on the catalogue and price list
lead to the fair inference that the ma
tHllltfy Ill WHICH lHt utlt1udll ttdll
was manufactured in New York. He
was advertised as a constructing and
consulting engineer. who had his Office
at Liberty street, New York.
It is evident that the plaintiffs tele-
graphic order, please ship clam shell
at once" was made on the suppOsition
that the shipment was to be from New
York. and their inquiry, What time
on the road made simultaneous with
the order. gave in connection with the
words lat once" emphasis to the fact
that the machine was needed without
delay.
Under the circumstances shown by
the report there was unreasonable de-
lay in the transit. The defendant did
not fulfill the contract of sale, and the
plaintiffs are not bound thereby. They
We're justified in declining to accept
the machine. and are entitled to re-
cover back the payment advanced.
Judgment for the plaintiffs.
Oxford County-Rumford Falls Boom
co. VS.. Rumford Falls Paper Co. Re-
script by Savage, J.
by an instrument under seal the par
ties made an alternative contract with
each other. relative to sorting. boom
ing. holding and delivering the defend
ants logs which should from time to
time come into the plaintiffs boom.
Ey one alternative, and the only one
necessary to be considered here, it was
provided that under certain contingent
cisS the defendant should have the
right, if it so elected, TO take posses
sion and exercise control Of the boom,
piers and boomage rights of the plain
tiff, and operate the business of re-
ceiving. sorting, handling and deliver
ing logs and lumber in the same man.
ner as said Rumford Falls Boom Co.
is now required to carry on said bust
ness" The contract further provided
that in the event of the defendants
Exercising the rights aforesaid then
it shall collect the expense of receiving,
holding. sorting and delivering such
l)ss and lumber from such other firms
and corporations" as have acquired
| rights relative to such booming bust
ness, (which expense shall include the
matters and things only for which said
ltumford Falls Boom Co. would have
been permitted to charge in the event
of its operating said business, and said
Rumford Falls Paper Co. shall pay
said Rumford Falls Boom Co. its pro-
portionate part of said 10 per cent.
upon said capital stock" Elsewhere
in the contract it appears that said 10
per cent. of said capital stock meant
| 10 per cent. each year on the capital
stock of the plaintiff company. which
It was agreed should at all times equal.
but at no time exceed, the net cost OF
the plaintiffs booms. piers, and so
forth. including renewals, improve
| ments and additions. but excluding or
Cinary repairs The term proportion
atn part of said 10 per cent" is else
w;iese defined to be proportion de-
termined by the proportion which the
! DEFENDANTS logs and other lumber