Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1903-10-30
SANDER SUIT.
william H. Johnson, Plaintiff,
John K. PooIer, Defendant.
Did Defendant Accuse Plaintiff Of
Killing Cow Moose.
Guild VS.. Railroad Company Case Again
to be Tried.

A writ, with the ad damnum placed at
sz'ooo has been entered for trial at the
present term of the Kennebec County
superior Court and is unique in the his
tory OF Maine Jurisprudence. The plain
tlH is William H. Johnson of Augusta
ana the defendant John X Pooler of Old
Town. The plaintiff sues to recover dam
ages because, as he alleges. the defendant
wrongfully accused him of killing a cow
moose
The writ alleges that the plaintiff is
good, true and honest citizen of the State
OF Maine, and from the time of his ma
tlvity has hitherto behaved and governed
himself as SUCH and during all that time
hath been held, esteemed and reputed of
good name, character and reputation, as
we'll as among a great number of fellow
citizens as among all his ne1ghbors and
acquaintance and during all that time
hath been free from the atrocious crime of
killing a cow moose illegally, nevertheless
the said defendant in no wise ignorant of
the premises, but contriving and mali
ciously intending. not only to injure the
said plaintiff, and deprive him Of his good
name, character and reputation, but also
to cause the said plaintiff to be brought
under the pains and penalty of the Law
provided against the killing of COW
moose unlawfully, at Augusta, in saio
county on the tenth day of August, A. d.
1908, did publicly, falsely and maliciouslS
charge him with the crime of killing [.
COW moose unlawfully by words writer.
and published by him. the said defendant,
by the plaintiff, as follows: "A man by
the name of Mr.. Johnson meaning the
plaintiff) shot the COW moose back of the
camp on the little BROOK meaning that
the plaintiff illegally shot a COW moose
back of his camp in the woods in Deem
Der, A. D. 1899, by means of publishing
which said false. feigned, scandalous and
malicious words. he, the said plaintiff is
not only injured and prejudiced in his
good name and reputation, but has been
liable to be prosecuted for the offense of
illegally killing a COW moose, and has un
dergone great fatigue and bodily labor to
falsify the said assertions spread of him.
the said plaintiff, and has been injured
and prejudiced in his good name chaIac-
ter and reputation, and has undergone
great pain, distress, and trouble of mind
and body, and has otherwise been greatly
injured.
Hon. l.. 7. Carleton of Winthrop, chair.
man of the State fish and game commits
sion, appears as counsel for the plalntif1
and Hon. Charles f. johnson of Water
vile for the defendant.
A case. which will arouse some inter
est will be again tried at this term. IT
is an action for land damages and the
plaintiff is A. Manley Guild of Ausus,.
and the defendant the Augusta, Winthrop
& Gardiner Electric Railway Company.
The case was tried at the October term
of the supreme judicial court last year
and the jury returned a verdict for the
plaintiff, assessing the damage at $707.56.
The case was carried to the law court by
the counsel for the defendant and that
tribunal granted a new trial.
The case was an appeal from the dec:s
ion of the county commissioners. When
the Winthrop extension of the railroad
was built the road passed through the
land of the appellant under the act
passed by the Legislature of 1893 giving an
electric railroad company the right of
eminent domain and giving the proper
tribunal the power to set fair value to
the property thus taken.
The case was the first of its kind to be
tried in the Maine courts where an cleo
trio railroad company has been involved,
although of course there have been many
cases where the litigation concerned the
roads run by steam.
The testimony on the part of the plain
tiff tended to show that the land at issue
was worth more than the amount allowed
by the county commissioners. The de
fence contended that the offer was just
and equitab BILE and the building of the road
greatly enhanced the value of the proper
ty.
William H. Mcclellan, Esq. of Belfast
and Joseph Williamson of the firm of
Williamson & Burleigh of Augusta APP
peared as counsel for the appellant and
Herbert NJ. Heath Esq. of the firm of
Heath & Andrews and Thomas j. Lynch, |
Esq, for the defendant company.