Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1904-02-03
THURSDAY, JAN. Is.

THURSDAY, JAN. 2S.
At the opening of the court Thursday
morning the jury returned a sealed YER
Gaypor. The verdict WAS for the pain
tiff. and damages were assessed at $40
The case OF the Pittsburg Plate Glass
Co., OF Boston, VS.. Billings, a contractor
of Bar Hs-bor. occupied all day Thurs
day.
This was an action brought by the
plaintiff to recover, the amount az q bill
rendered to the defendant for plate glass
ia the summer OF 1903.
In the spring OF 1903 the defendant
ordered of the plaintiff two lights OF
plate glass-the larger being about Sx10
feet--to be sent by rail as soon as possible.
The glass was packed and shipped as
directed in good order, but when the
defendant received the glass, the larger
OF the two lights was broken, the defend
ant claimed that the glass was improperly
not heavy enough to stand the strain Of
q 800 pound square Of glass.
he also claimed that the glass was not
OF merchantable quality, II being In some
places 3-16 Of an inch thick and in other
places " of an inch. He claimed that
this was partly the cause OF the glass
breaking.
The defense produced several exhibits,
and among them being several peices Of
the lumber contained IN the box, and
which was only " of an inch thick.
The plaintiff claimed that the boz had
been packed in.the usual manner and that
1t had been handled with great care by
all the employees OF the company on &C.
count OF It's great size. The company al
80 claimed that II the glass was broken
when landed at Mr.. Billings store, that 1t
had been done In transit or In moving
from the wharf In Bar Harbor. The
plaintiff alsc claimed that the variations
in the thickness OF the glass did not
materially lessen the strength of 1t.
The argument by both counsels at the
close OF the testimony was quite
lengthy, also the judges charge.
The jury returned q verdict for the
plaintiff In the sum Of s6s 81. Fellows and
Benson for plaintiff; e. =. Clark for de-
PENDANT.
FRIDAY, JAN. %.
Friday morning the Bar Harbor buck
board company We. Wells carriage COM
pany occupied the attention OF the court.
This was an action on the art of the
plaintiff company to recover on two
carriages 1t had bought of the defendant
company in the spring and summer Of
IA.
poorly constructed.
In April, 1908, the plaintiff bought two
runabouts from the defendant which
were afterward sold to parties In Bar
Harbor, and W hich had proved very I'M
satisfactory.
On one OF the carriages 1t was claimed
that the wheels dropped off after running
equally as bad panels cracking and
otherwise coming apart.
The defense admitted the defects in the
carriages above mentioned, but claimed
that they occurred through the careles
handling of the vehicle. They alsos
claimed that they had offered to make
good all defective parts, which was the
usual custom OF the trade.
Expert carriage makers were brought
forth as witnesses to show that the con-
struction OF the carriage was first class, as
represented. These experts also testified
that the defects were nothing but what
were liable to occur to any carriage; that
the fact OF the rims cracking showed that
the material used was OF the best. II it
had been second-grade stock the rims
would not have cracked in that manner.
The jury returned verdict for the
plaintiff In the sum OF s110.36. Deasy for
plaintiff; Peters for defendant.
SATURDAY, JAN. 80.
Saturday forenoon the contested d.
vorce case of Charles Hutchings and
wife was continued. About six weeks
ago a hearing was held before Judge
Emery on this same case. The wife
wanted separation till the January term,
when she would apply for divorce. The
judge granted her plea, and ordered the
iibellee to pay his wife 20 per week until
the divorce was granted. This Hutchings
has failed to do, and has since been con-
fined to jail for contempt of court.
Saturday the hearing was concluded
and divorce granted the libellant. The
custody OF the five children was also given
TO her
This is truly pitifui case-one OF the
saddest ever before the county court. This
young couple met and married at Verona
seven years ago, when the libeliant was
fifteen years OF age. Since that time
six children have been born to
them, one of whom died. Hutchings
owns farm at Verona, but 1t Is evident
from evidence produced that 1t is covered
with notes from one end to the other.
II the children were given to the father
he could not properly take care of them,
for he was confined to jail by order of
Judge Emery, and could not get out with
out paying the alimony of IS per week.