Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-03-06
BRENNAN-BRIDCE co. CASE l
An Effort Made To-Day to Have
 It Settled.

!The Attorneys fer Brennan Want
 Company to Pay Up-Two Diyorces
 Were Granted and Two Went Over Until Next Week.
 The case of William Brennan versus the Berlin Iron Bridge company came Up before Judge Elmer at short cal endar in the superior court to-day III the form of a motion to settle and de- termine the form of Judgment as giy- en by the supreme court and for fur ther allowance of S1OO to the plaintiff under the statutes. Attorneys O'Neill and Kennedy appeared for the plaint- if and Attorney Loomis of Hartford for the defendant MT O'NeiH stated what he has repeatedly stated before, going over the case from the first trial about seven years ago, when Judgment for $2, ,1GG was given for the plaintiff, the various appeals and re- jected judgments and reversals of judgment and finally the action of the supreme court in allowing $5Oand costs
 besides the original judgment for s. GOO and costs. Now, it seems, the company in which defendant had in- sured it's employees against accident, now refuses to pay the judgmen. on the ground that it should not be com pelled to pay the two judgments. It offered to pay one judgment, the S10 and costs, and this was refused and that was all it could do and having done it complied with the order of the supreme court.
 Attorney Loomis held that the iudg-
 mention $50 and costs was bar to paying the one for $300O. Attorney O'Neill replied that tho $50 judgment was part of tho S3O00 l judgment and that the supreme court so decided Decision was reserved. Of the long list of divorce cases only i four were on sIort calendar and two of them wse-c put over 10 next week.
 They were Minnie 0. Chatield versus
 Royal E. Chatield and Thomas l.. Ira I vers versus Emma Travers.
 The first case called was Jennie K.
 Latham versus William W. Latham. 1 Infidelity was charged and plaintiff asked that her maiden name Waldo
 be restored to her. She testified that l she lives in this city and has been here about a year. She was married In
 Taunton, Mass, October 2, 1898. For
 while they lived in Ansonia and on
 April 9, 1902, they parted. In May of
 that year plaintiff heard defendant
 was going to Ansonia, She had heard also that he was keeping company
 with girl and she decided to watch him. So with q friend she took the
 next train and saw her husband and
 a girl pass by the Dayton house on
 Main street and few minutes after
 they went in. Next morning she in- quired at the hotel for them and saw on I the register that they had registered there the night before as W. W. La tham and wife, of Waterbury. The
 register was produced and identified | by the present proprietor of the Day
 ton house.
 Grace Kenney of Bridgeport tesu- fled she searched Ansonia with plaint- Tiff for defendant, and Rose O'Brien, l also of Bridgeport, testified to the in
 cident in Ansonia. The petition was
 granted.
 l Elizabeth D. Pierpont versus Will liam E. Pierpont was the next case.
 Desertion was the allegation. Mrs Pier
 pont stated that she lives here and
 was married in January, 1893. Her
 attention to his conduct was first
 aroused by an anonymous article in a
 newspaper. She questioned him about l it and he admitted he was the one al- ! 1uded to. Tn 1896 he deserted her. John c. Latos, cigar dealer, 16 North Leonard street, lent defendant
 $2 the day he left town.
 | (N FTN,,4xx T "A. Thomas testified for the complain l ant. The petition was granted and
 plaintiffs maiden name Darrell re- l stored
 l Margaret Fulton asked divorce
 from James M. Fulton, the popular
 musician. on the grounds of intemper.
 ance. The custody of one child Olga
 was also asked for. Inconsistency
 and the artistic temperament played
 prominent part in this case. Kate l Jennings, a neighbor, Harry Weitz, 1 George W. Blake, neighbor, and Dr
 F. J. OaCallag ghan, were the witnesses. 1 The petition was granted and the GUS l tody of the child left with Mrs Full ] ton.
 The case of Richards vs Peck ct al l was continued to Tuesday. When that
 is finished the appeal of the city from
 the decision of the board of railroad
 commissioners in the Oakvihe trolley
 case will be taken up. The commis-
 sioners gave the trolley company per
 mission to lay their tracks under the 1 bridge without widening the same.
 The city, knowing this would be q great danger to the public, appealed 1 the matter to the superior court. There 1 is a possibility of the case being ad- I justed out of court. The trolley com pany has agreed to bear 55 per cent of
 the expense of the court proceedings in
 case they fail to throw the entire bur den on the Consolidated Railroad Go, which it is claimed. is trespasser on
 the highway If that case goes out the case of Wells against the town of l Woodbury will be taken up.
 storm Caused High Water. l HOOSICK FALLS, N. T., March G. l Heavy snow, followed by rain, has in- l creased the swollen condition of local