Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1902-12-30
$4,000 VERDICT.
Rendered in Dixon Damage
Suit in Supreme Court.
S. merset Liquors Dealers Heavily
Fined and Timely Warned.
Justice Strout Will Impose Jail SEN
fences Hereafter.

Skowhegan, Me-, Dec 29.-(SpeciaD.-
In the suit of Samuel H. Dixon vs.
the American Wooden Co.. the jury, af-
ter being out an hour and a half, re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff. A
motion to set the verdict aside has
been filed by counsel for the defend
ants.
dictmcnts were brought before the
court. The greater part consisted Of
cases handed down from the law court,
which We're appealed upon demurrers
to the indictments at the September
term. These were all decided in ia
vor of the State. and were in order
for sentence. 1t being understood that
the greater part of the old offenders
have permanently abandoned the traf-
fic. the penalties imposed were some
what lighter than they would other
wise nave been. but Judge Strout en-
phatically announced that hereafter no
mercy should be shown to persistent
viclators of the law, and Jail sentences
warning. The cases were disposed of
as follows. all fines and costs being
paid in full:
Frank c. Kendall, saloon keeper,
Fairfield. 5000 and costs for being a
common seller. 5000 and costs for
maintaining a nuisance. and 500 for
keeping drinking house and tipping
shop.
Trueman A. Witham, saloon keeper,
Fairfield, same indictment and same
fines.
Eugene Evans, druggist, Fairfield,
mol pressed for want of evidence, the
only foundation for the Indictment be-
ing the United States license carried
by Mr.. Evans
Selden c. Scammon, Fairfield, mol
pressed. Respondent deceased.
William ]. Bradbury, proprietor Ho-
tel Gerald, two indictments, 5000 fine
and costs.
Edward b. Quint, North New Port
land. hotel proprietor, 500 and costs on
nuisance Indictment, others continued
for sentence.
Henry B. Washburn. hotel proprietor,
Madison. 500 and costs for keeping
drinking house and tippling shop; other
indictments continued
Ruius Burns. hotel proprietor. Pitts
Held. 800 and costs for being common
seller. other indictments continued.
Cephas NJ. Hilton, hotel proprietor.
Madison. 5000 and costs.
Charles F. Horne, hotel proprietor.
bingham, search and seizure process,
Sloo and costs. tippling shop, 500 and
costs. other indictments continued.
H. l.. Williams, Hartland, hotel pro-
prietor for being a common seller. slg,:
tro Keeping tipping shop, 500.
). {. Durrell. Flagstaff. for being com.
mon seller. 500 and costs.
CHARLES and Warren futile and Fred
Towle. hotel proprietors. Skowhegan. 500
1nd costs, on three indictments and three
appeal cases.
Walter Pierce. George B. Fairgrieyes.
John d. Symons and A. E. Bisson Skou-
hogan. saloonkeepers, three indictments
each. 500 and costs
Edward F. Pomlow, Skowheean. saloon
keeper. three complaints appealed from
skowhesan municipal court, and three in
dictments. $500 and costs.
Charles A. Fairbrother Norridgewock.
hotel proprietor. 500 and costs.
Manley d. Bean. The Forks. continued
on payment of costs.
Charles III. Spaulding. Harmony. con-
tinued on payment of costs.
Monday morning. the suit Of the Inhab-
itants of Palmyra against the Wavery
WOODEN Company was placed on trial be-
fore drawn jury. of which Albert ".
Smith OF Skowhegan. was appointed fore
man by the court. This is an action fo,,
the loss of bridge the property of the
plaintiff town. which. it is claimed. was
destroyed by the high water in the spring
OF 1851 owing to the unlawful act of the
defendants in constructing and maintain
ing dam of such height as to materially
raise the level of the water at the po1n,
where the bridge was carried away. The
amount claimed as damages is 5000. Tile
bridge is situated in the town of Palmy-
ra, about three miles above the dam Of
the defendants. which is located in the
town of Pittsfield. The dam was origi-
naIiy constructed by the Douglas Dam
Water Power Company, and was purchas-
ed by the Waverly Wooden Company
The loss of the bridge. as the plaintiff;
maintain. was directly due to the large
masses Of ice which came down against
it from above. and which were caused by
the flowage of the land above the bridge
to a greater extent than would have oc
CURED had the dam not existed 1t is
claimed that the level of the river at The
bridge was four to five feet higher than
before the dam was built. The defence
in reply maintain that the freshet was
an extraordinary one which no reasonable
amount of foresight could have foreseen.
that the bridge was improperly con-
structed. whereby the plaintiffs own neg
iigence contributed to the loss, and that
they were authorized by legislative enact
ments. general and special, to erect and
maintain the dam at its present height.
Tie case involves several important ie-
gal questions. Forrest Goodwin. Esq. APP
pears for the plaintiffs. and John W.
Manson and George II. Morse for the dc
PENDANTS.
The next action in order for trial Is tina
of Alden A. Savage VS. George II. Tu;tic