Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1902-10-28
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT.
OCTOBER TERN. 1902.

OCTOBER TERN, 1902.
Sewall C. Strout, Justice Presiding
Charles F. Whitman, Clerk
A. 81. Whitman, Stenographer
Ellery c. Park, County Attorney
James r. Tucker, Sheriff
II. Z. Hammond, Crier
Walter L. Gray, Librarian
w. A. BarrOws, Messenger
FIRST JURY.
Adelbert Delano. Canton, Foreman.
A. c. Andrews, Stow.
Aldana Brooks. Upton.
Alvin Brown, Norway.
Charles Chandler, Fryeburg:
William L. Chapman, Bethel
John w. Chute, Paris.
John Colby, Denmark.
Fred j. Dunbar, Hebron.
Daniel Fletcher. Hartford.
W. s. French. Oxford.
Sherman Haselt0n, ALBANY.
SECOND JURY.
John Stephens, Rumford, Foreman.
j. II. JENNIE, Roxbury.
William II. Morrow. Bethel.
William A. Paul, Dix1eld.
Frank 4. Quint. Brownfeld.
David p. Richards. Andover.
G. Barrett Spaulding. Buck1eld.
Frank r.. Stone, Sweden.
NJ. L. ThurstOn, Sewry.
Elmer e. Tuell. Paris.
=. T. WadswOrth. Hiram.
George e. West Sumner.
sUPeRNUMERARIEs.
ri. r. whitman, Mexico.
Frank G. Noble, Norway.
MULHoLLAND VS.. OXFORD.
Joan A. Mulholland VS.. Inhabitants of
Oxford. This case, the first civil case of
the term, went on trial Monday forenoon.
1t is suit to recover damages for inju-
ries sustained by the plaintiff in breaking
through an alleged defective sidewalk in
Oxford village, on the oath of Septem-
Der, 1901. The plaintiff is, or was at
that time, quite heavy woman, and
the sidewalk where she broke through
was at considerable height from the
ground. The plaintiff alleges that in
consequence of the accident, the sciatic
nerve was injured, causing one leg to
wither, and that she also suffered inter
nal injuries. She travels with a crutch
and a cane, and appears very lame.
Libby & Andrews of Mechanic Falls for
plaintiff; Hazen of Oxford for defence.
uC llldl VI tillS CdSC, WillSl vac SSll-
mated by one of the attorneys to last
half day, was opened Monday forenoon
and closed about the middle of Wednes-
day afternoon. The jury was out some
less than an hour, and returned a verdict
for the plaintiff of Sl025. A motion for
a new trial was filed.
DUGGAN VS.. ELLIOTT AND DEMERITT.
John Duggan VS.. Harris L. Elliott and
James L. Demeritt This was an action
for false Imprisonment brought by John
Duggan of Rumford Falls against
Deputy Sheriff Elliott and Police Officer
Demeritt. On the night of Sunday,
Aug. II, 1901, these officers raided a
room in Lebrecque Block where they
suspected gambling was going on. AS
they broke into the room, one of the
men in there threw some cards on the
floor, and another threw some out of the
window. The officers told the men in the
whom Duggan was one-to
themselves under arrest, and
took them to the lookup, eight of them,
and shut them up for the night. In the
afternoon of Monday they were brought
before the Rumford Falls Municipal
Court for trial, and after hearing it
was finally agreed by the officers and
the attorney for the accused men, Mr..
Stearns, that a mol pros should be en-
tered on condition that the men promise
good conduct for the future, which was
accordingly done, and they were dis
charged. The plaintiff, Duggan, asserts
that he was wrongfully placed under
arrest by the officers without warrant,
that the lookup in which he was con-
fined was poorly ventilated, offensive
from the presence of drunken prisoners,
and in an unsanitary condition; that the
issuing of warrant and the trial We're
delayed that he was re-
fused an opportunity to procure bail,
and was paraded before the eyes of a
curious multitude as he was conducted
by the officers through the streets; that
he was told he was under arrest for
gambling, and was then arraigned on a
complaint for Sabbath violation.
In reply the defendants assert that
they were fully justified by the circum-
stances in making the raid, and in plac-
ing the men under arrest that the lock-
up was in good condition, and that all
necessary arrangements for the COM
fort of the men were made; that
they were told in the first place that
they were under arrest for 'gaming on
the Lords day; that the warrants were
taken out and the cases heard in court
IS soon as practicable ; and that the men
we're given full opportunity to procure
counsel, and all their rights carefully
observed.
After the evidence was in, Judge
Strout informed the parties that he
should rule, and so instruct the jury,
that the officers were not justified in
arresting the men without warrant,
and the defendants being liable, the
question for the jury was the amount of
damages. The case was accordingly
argued on that basis. The jury was out
a short time, and returned verdict for
plaintiff of S9.4S.
Williams of Lewiston and Libby of
Mechanic Falls for Duggan. Bisbee and
Stearns for defendants.
This case was finished Thursday after
noon, and the last jury was then dis
charged, there being no more jury cases.
The suit for alienation of affections,
brought by Philander l.. Bigelow against
j. Damon, was settled out OF