Montour American. (Danville, Pa.) 1866-1920, 1902-09-25
PROCEEDINGS Of
SEPTEMBER COURT

Oil lLMDLN JUUh |
Court convened Monday morning
at ten o'clock. President Judge X.
II. Little and the two associates. Dr.
5. Y. Thompson and Frank G.. Blcc.
were on the bench. Thomas Bailey of
Limestone township, Mcclellan Diehl
of Washingtonvillc and G. W. Ben.
nett of Valley township were appoint
cd tipstaffs, the first mentioned to at
tend the grand jury and the two latter
to wait upon the court. NJ II. Schram
was sworn as foreman of the grand
jury. Richard Rogers, boss roller at
the Reading Iron Works, drawn as a
grand juror, was excused.
The session of court opened with a
mild sensation. The constables of the
county were presenting their returns
when Thomas Bailey of Limestone
township, reported neglect on the
| part of supervisors. Tue roads, he
said, are in bad condition, mt many
places being full of loose stones and in
need of repair The plank on bridges
| were reported a. unsafe and index
boards as down or so badly defaced by
time as to be of little service.
The court thought this serious
matter and instructed the District At
torney to present a bill of Indictment
against the supervisors of the town
ship.
The action of trespass brought
against the borou wv. II. j. Biz
zard. which was e come up for
trial at this term has veen carried over
to next court. Judge Little decided
upon a continuance in order to consid-
er petition presented by Edward s.
Gearhart, attorney for the borough,
praying that a rule be granted upon
W. II. j. Blizzard to show cause why
the several suits untried and undispos-
ed of shall not be consolidated into
one action for the purpose of trial.
LII tlllS COIutCtlOu IL iuaN lnItItSI
our citizens to know that of the sever
al actions of trespass brought against
the borough by Mr.. Blizzard twelve
are still pending. All are upon precise
ly the same cause of action, namely, the
alleged maintenance and continuance
of q certain nuisance in the alleged
use, pollution, etc, of certain stream
of water flowing through the premises
of W. H. j. Blizzard.
tried i'll September, 1891, when n ver-
dict was rendered in favor of the plain
tiff for the sum of 1915. Subsequent
ly actions were tried and disposed of
as follows: March term, 1897, which
brought verdict of S215 in favor or
the plaintiff; October term, 1897,
which re. ulted iii verdict of 500 for
the plainriff June term, 1898, in which
a verdict was rendered on October 81,
1901, in favor of the plaintiff for $500.
The aggregate of these verdicts is
$1340, all of which has been paid. Add
to this the heavy items of cost incl
dental to the several actions and it will
be seen how dearly the borough has
already paid for the alleged nuisance
in Billiards. run.
Mr.. Gearhart in his petit IN states
that in the said actions brought to
Nos. A, 45, 46 and IS of September
term, 1901, the summons were issued
but "a hours apart for the avowed pur-
pose of depressing the said defendant
and of mulcting it in useless unneces-
sary and burdensome costs and ex-
penses.
He reminded the court that separ-
ate trial for each of the twelve actions |
pending would still further involve "a |
vast and unnecessary amount of the |
public time of court and still further |
entail large burdensome and unneces-
sary outlays of money for witness fees
and other expenses.
Further the petition explained since
the last trial the Lyons drain has been
removed, which in that action con-
stituted and still constitutes the sole |
basis of complaint. 1t was, therefore, |
asked that the causes of action remain
ing untried and undisposed of be |
Joined in the same declara-
tion or statement.
Hon. H. NJ Hinckley for the plaint
iff addressed the Court opposing the
measure and urging that the trial
proceed the present term. The court,
however, decided to hold the matter
under advisement.
The traverse jurors drawn for the |
September term according TO instruc-
tions put in their appearance at court
Tuesday morning. The case of Com
VS.. Francis Woll proceed |
ed promptly to trial. The defendant
was charged with violating the act of
1899 which prohibits the purchase of |
brass or junk i'll any form from minors |
or from unknown or irresponsible |
parties.
On September %, 1901, Woll's resid-
ence was searched when small box |
of brass or spelter, such as Is used for
brazing at the Structural Tubing |
Works, was found i'll a chest in his |
cellar Testimony was adduccd to
show that at the hearing before Justice |
of the Peace Bare the defendant stated |
that he had purchased the brass of n
peddler whom hc did not know.
When placed ON trial Tuesday Woll |
testified that he purchased the spclter
from we'll known local junk dealer
whom he named.
The trial occupied the forenoon.
The defendant was represented by
Harry Bare, District Attorney Welsh
looking after the Commonwealth.
The jury returned verdict of not
guilty, dividing the costs equally be-