Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1902-02-13
BROTHERS At WAR IN LAW
Superior Court Tries The Case Of John
Gam Us. James H. S. Gam.
THE SUIT is OVER A SMALL SUM
Amount Involved, s SOL, With
Interest.
CYCLE co. GETSAVERDlCT OF 6 CENTS


perior Court Monday morning, the first
case called being that of the Whining
ton Cycle Co. VS.. Griffin Rash. The
plaintiff was represented by William s.
Hilles and the defendant by Artsmas
and Martin Il. Smith. Graham Tag
CART, bookkeeper for tho company,
testified that Rash obtained bicycle
and was to pay 1888 for it, on weekly
instruments, but he ceased making
payments after the amount had reached
$50. 70. after which the case went to
the jury.
A verdict in favor Of the plaintiff for
six cents and costs was returned in the
case of the Wilmington Cycle Co. VS..
Griffin Rush. '...r.
Brother against Brother was ex-
cmplified in the trial of the case of
John Gam, defendant below, appellant,
vs. James Fl. S. Gam, plaintiff below,
respondent. I. Bayard Heisel repre-
| scented JAMES, who brought the original
suit, and George L. Townsend, Jr.,
represented John, the defendant. Tho
brothers were formerly partners. John
ran Augustine Park and James man
aged n boat, which ran to the park.
James held that claim of John
Kelley's of slS.9l, for wages, should
have been paid by John, on the ground
| that John employed Kelley. The amount
involved was the SIS. 81, with interest
from December 10Th, 1900. James paid
the S19 81 after Constable W. Il. Money
| had levied on his goods, and now sues
to recover from John.
James Gam claimed that under the
articles of agreement, John, having
hired Kelley, should pay him Kelley
testified that John employed him.
In Superior Court Tuesday, in
the case of James II. S. Gam VS., John
Gam, the jury returned verdict in
favor of James Gam for 500. 20, being
the total of the claim with interest.
Judgment for Cam was for costs was
granted in the case of William Grow,
Jr.. VS.. Richard 7. Cam.
| The court ordered a nonsuit in the
case of Thomas s. Vandever VS.. the
Baltimore & Philadelphia Railroad
Co., Townsend & Walker for the plain
| tiff and Bird and Sanborn for the de
PENDANT. On February LIST, 1901, Van
dever was coming into market in a
dearborn and while crossing the track
near Wooddale was struck by train !;
| his wagon was demolished and he was
injured. The case was marked with a
peremptory rule for trial ut this term.
Counsel for the plaintiff filed atfidavits
showing that subp9nas had been
issued last Saturday and some wit
nesses had not been found, and that
two important witnesses, DR.. l.. II.
Ball, the Congressman, and Victorine
| Vandever, who was in Philadelphia,
were absent. The court held that sub
penas for witnesses must go out when
the trial list is made up, and stated
that the case must go to trial.
Then Mr.. Bird offered to allow the
plaintiff to put on the stand such wit
nesses as he had, and after the defence
witnesses for the plaintiff which he
could not earlier secure. But Mr..
Walker declined this offer. The court
ruled that all had been done by the
defendant that could reasonably he ex-
pected, and directed that nonsuit be
entered.
Court adjourned until 2 30 o'clock.
B. K. Lee, juror from Pencader
hundred, residing near Newark, is con-
graduating himself that his daughter,
Antoinette, escaped death in an acct
dent near Newark station Saturday
night. She was out driving with
Charles Cannon, Jr., and as they
crossed the tracks, a fast train whisked
the rims from the two rear wheels of
the buggy. The buggy fell back upon
the axles, but the young people escaped
injury.
First case called for trial yesterday
morning in the Superior Court was
that of George H. Wilson Va. The Har-
Ian & Hollingsworth Co. The plaintiff
was represented by james Ponder and
Charles M. Curtis and tho defendant
by Levi c. Bird and Andrew E. San
born.
Mr. Wilson sued for 81, 500, which he
claimed as damages for the breach of a
contract to employ him at the rate Of
S36 per week, Mr.. Wilson, who is a
naval architect, and had been in the
service of the United States goven-
ment, claimed that by his contract
with the company, which was dated
February 10Th, 1901, he was to be ON
ployed by the company at the rate OF
$50 per week until the completion and
acceptance by the United States gov
eminent of the torpedoboat destroyers
Hull and the Hopkins. These boats
have not yet been completed.
A jury was drawn and the plaintiff
proved the following letter:
Wilmington, Del, Feb. 10, 1S01.-Mr.
George H. Wilson-Dear Sir: Confirming
interview of this a. M, it is understood
that you enter our employ, beginning this
date, and that your compensation will he
thirty-six 1885, dollars per week the terms
to be notice in writing at any time by
either party-no time notice-and the minor
conditions as to your service to be accord
ing to verbal understanding of today.
Please acknowledge in confirmation and
oblige. Very truly yours,
H. L. Cause, President.
| frhn nln al 1
to prove by the plaintiff that this
written agreement was not the full
agreement, but that there was verbal
contract different from the above letter.
Mr.. Bird, for the defendant, objected
to the admission of any verbal ev
dence, claiming that the letter was the
contract, and that its terms could not
be varied, contradicted or enlarged by
verbal evidence. The court sustained
Mr.. Birds contention.
Mr.. Ponder of counsel for plaintiff,
then admitted that this ruling of the
court ended his case; for the above
letter sustained the defendants con
tention that it had right at any time,
upon written notice, to discharge the
plaintiff.
The court then instructed the jury
to find o verdict for the defendant,
which was done.
Mr.. Wilson was paid up to May, LIST,
1901, when the company had no further
need for his services
The cases of Horace p. Adams
against the Wilmington & New Castle
Electric Railway Co., John p. Farley
and Victorine A. Farley against tho
same company, and John p Farley vs..
the same company, were continued
until the next term. The cases Of the