Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1903-11-03
Supreme judicial Court.
OCTOBER TERM, 1908.

OCTOBER TERN, 1908.
HENRY C. PEABODY, Justice Presidin,
y CHARLES F. WHITMAN, Clerl
j. A. HAYDEN, Stenographe
ELLERY c. PARK, County Attorne.
. EDGAR l.. FLINT, Sheriff
: II. Z. HAMMOND, Crie
w. A. BARROws, Messenge'
!, WALTER l.. GRAY, Librarian
|, ROvINsKY WINS INSURANCE CASES.
The cases of Joseph Rovinsky of Run
. ford Falls against the Northern Assul
. ance Co. and the Insurance Co. of tn
County of Philadelphia, which were o
, trial Monday, filled nearly two days G
r the third week, or almost four days an
. a half in all. Few cases have ever II
. quired such infinitesimal detail in regar
, to every matter testified,to, and the size
color and condition of about everythin
in the Rovinsky house as we'll as lots
other things, had to be hammered owe
and over time and time again; and
anybody connected with the court hasn'
in his mind series of very exact AM
detailed photographs of the Rovinsk
house at various stages of the game,
is because, to speak photographically
the sensitiveueSs of his mind emulsion ]
below the standard for a slow Landscape
plate.
The testimony was finally closet
Monday night, and the forenoon session
Tuesday was devoted to the arguments
For the defence Hon. L. c. Cornish o.
Augusta, and for the plaintiff Hon
John P. Swasey, made very able argu
ments, heard with interest by large
number of spectators. An hour and {
half was occupied by Judge Peabody''
instructions, and the jury retired little
after p. NJ. They remained out until
about o'clock the next morning, wher
they settled upon verdict for the plant
iff for the full amount sued for, with
interest-S526.50 in one case and S1053.0C
in the other. The case will 60 to the
law court on motion for new trial.
OXFORD VS.. TURNER.
Immediately following the insurance
cases was begun the trial of the Inhabit-
ants of Oxford VS.. the Inhabitants of
Turner. This was an action to recover
for pauper supplies furnished in 1901 to
one Azariah Jackson, who is claimed by
the plaintiffs to have had "pauper set
Element" in Turner This claim of set
Element is based upon his continuous
residence in North Turner, as asserted
by the plaintiffs, from 1882 till 1898. He
had gone away from North Turner several
times during this period, for longer or
shorter times, to visit or labor. He was a
laboring man, single, possessed of few
personal effects, and except for two short
periods, when he held title to small
places in Turner, of no real estate. But
it is asserted by the plaintiffs on the
testimony of Jackson himself. that he
all the time regarded North Turner as
his home, and that his absences were
only temporary, with the intention of
returning.
For the defence, it is asserted that at
no time during the sixteen years did
Jackson reside five years continuously
in Turner, but that he continually re-
fused to pay tax in Turner on the
ground that he was not resident there,
and that at several times when he left
the town for other places he had gone
with the declared intention of leaving
the town forever.
Jackson was the principal witness for
the plaintiffs, and was in some respects
a very entertaining witness. He is an
old soldier, somewhat infirm, rather
hard of hearing, and occasionally little
dull of apprehension. 1t seems that he
had been in the habit of keeping in
small books a more or less full record of
his movements, but these books of
record have disappeared, and the dates
which they contained have almost as
absolutely disappeared from his mind.
Although he remembered events and
of his life fairly well, it
was difficult for him to place them in
order, and almost impossible to get him
to fix an approximate date for any of
them. His answers to direct questions
were frequently as rambling as had been
his travels to and fro, and the effort to
get exact information out of him was
about as difficult as the proverbial
process of getting blood from turnip.
Hazen for plaintiffs; Swasey for de-
PENDANTS.
NeTulCt ioT pidiutiuS SSS.iS.
CRIMINAL BUSINESS.
Bert w. Tweedie paid fine of $50 and
costs of 800 for assault and battery on
Joseph R. Prince pleaded guilty to
arson on Tuesday, but sentence was de-
ferred till later in the term.
On Wednesday Charles Lowell of
Lewiston pleaded guilty to an indictment
as common seller. He has been in Jail
awaiting court since early in June. He
was given sentence of sixty days in
Jail.
Don l. Kimball of Mexico was brought
into the court room Wednesday after
noon to plead to an indictment for assault
with intent to kill. The assault was
committed upon his wife, on the 9th of
August, as was fully reported at the
time, and Kimball used knife which,
as he says, he had in his hand before he
saw his wife or knew she was coming.
County Attorney Park stated to the
court that after a full investigation of
all the circumstances of the case he was
convinced that the intent to kill could
not be proved, and he wished to mol pros
that part of the indictment. Kimball
then pleaded guilty to assault, and was
given a sentence of five months in Jail.
David Christie, who had first pleaded
not guilty on liquor nuisance indict-
ment, and had afterward retracted and
pleaded guilty, was brought into court
Thursday morning for sentence, and A.
E. Stearns addressed the court briefly in
his behalf, stating that Christie had
been in Jail since the 18th of June
awaiting trial, and asking that the fact
be taken into consideration in imposing
sentence. Judge Peabody said that he
could not give that consideration much
weight, and imposed a sentence of five
months in Jail at Auburn. Christie has
several times before been respondent
in liquor cases in this county.
The court then proceeded with the
trial of James NJ. Graves of Rumford
Falls on an indictment for liquor
nuisance and disorderly house. County
Attorney Park for the state, Swasey for
Graves.
Graves and his wife keep boarding
house, formerly known as the Somerset
House, on the corner of Maine Avenue
and Pine Street in Rumford Falls. The
nuisance alleged consisted of dances held
at the house during August and Septem-
Der of the present year, at which there
were present intoxicated men, according
to the testimony OF witnesses, and there
was drinking, quarreling, loud and pro-
fame conversation, disturbing the peace
of the neighborhood. The witnesses for
the state were principally the immediate
neighbors.
The contention of the defence is that